bilingual education research

Personal tools

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

• Legal Developments

The Civil Rights Project / Proyecto Derechos Civiles 8370 Math Sciences, Box 951521 Los Angeles, CA 90095-1521 [email protected]

• Copyright Policy
• Accessibility

Copyright © 2010 UC Regents

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

5 Million Voices

6 potential brain benefits of bilingual education.

Anya Kamenetz

Part of our ongoing series exploring how the U.S. can educate the nearly 5 million students who are learning English.

Brains, brains, brains. One thing we've learned at NPR Ed is that people are fascinated by brain research. And yet it can be hard to point to places where our education system is really making use of the latest neuroscience findings.

But there is one happy nexus where research is meeting practice: bilingual education. "In the last 20 years or so, there's been a virtual explosion of research on bilingualism," says Judith Kroll, a professor at the University of California, Riverside.

Again and again, researchers have found, "bilingualism is an experience that shapes our brain for a lifetime," in the words of Gigi Luk, an associate professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Education.

At the same time, one of the hottest trends in public schooling is what's often called dual-language or two-way immersion programs.

How We Teach English Learners: 3 Basic Approaches

Traditional programs for English-language learners, or ELLs, focus on assimilating students into English as quickly as possible. Dual-language classrooms, by contrast, provide instruction across subjects to both English natives and English learners, in both English and in a target language.

The goal is functional bilingualism and biliteracy for all students by middle school.

New York City, North Carolina, Delaware, Utah, Oregon and Washington state are among the places expanding dual-language classrooms.

The trend flies in the face of some of the culture wars of two decades ago, when advocates insisted on "English first" education. Most famously, California passed Proposition 227 in 1998. It was intended to sharply reduce the amount of time that English-language learners spent in bilingual settings.

Proposition 58 , passed by California voters on Nov. 8, largely reversed that decision, paving the way for a huge expansion of bilingual education in the state that has the largest population of English-language learners.

Bilingual Education Returns To California. Now What?

Some of the insistence on English-first was founded in research produced decades ago, in which bilingual students underperformed monolingual English speakers and had lower IQ scores.

Today's scholars, like Ellen Bialystok at York University in Toronto, now say that research was "deeply flawed."

"Earlier research looked at socially disadvantaged groups," agrees Antonella Sorace at the University of Edinburgh, in Scotland. "This has been completely contradicted by recent research" that compares more similar groups to each other.

So what does recent research say about the potential benefits of bilingual education? NPR Ed called up seven researchers in three countries — Sorace, Bialystok, Luk, Kroll, Jennifer Steele, and the team of Wayne Thomas and Virginia Collier — to find out.

It turns out that, in many ways, the real trick to speaking two languages consists in managing not to speak one of those languages at a given moment — which is fundamentally a feat of paying attention.

Saying "Goodbye" to mom and then " Guten tag " to your teacher, or managing to ask for a crayola roja instead of a red crayon, requires skills called "inhibition" and "task switching." These skills are subsets of an ability called executive function.

People who speak two languages often outperform monolinguals on general measures of executive function. "[Bilinguals] can pay focused attention without being distracted and also improve in the ability to switch from one task to another," says Sorace.

Do these same advantages accrue to a child who begins learning a second language in kindergarten instead of as a baby? We don't yet know. Patterns of language learning and language use are complex. But Gigi Luk at Harvard cites at least one brain-imaging study on adolescents that shows similar changes in brain structure when compared with those who are bilingual from birth, even when they didn't begin practicing a second language in earnest before late childhood.

Young children being raised bilingual have to follow social cues to figure out which language to use with which person and in what setting. As a result, says Sorace, bilingual children as young as age 3 have demonstrated a head start on tests of perspective-taking and theory of mind — both of which are fundamental social and emotional skills.

Reading (English)

About 10 percent of students in the Portland, Ore., public schools are assigned by lottery to dual-language classrooms that offer instruction in Spanish, Japanese or Mandarin, alongside English.

Jennifer Steele at American University conducted a four-year, randomized trial and found that these dual-language students outperformed their peers in English-reading skills by a full school year's worth of learning by the end of middle school.

Such a large effect in a study this size is unusual, and Steele is currently conducting a flurry of follow-up studies to tease out the causality: Is this about a special program that attracted families who were more engaged? Or about the dual-language instruction itself?

"If it's just about moving the kids around," Steele says, "that's not as exciting as if it's a way of teaching that makes you smarter."

'Invisible' Children: Raised In The U.S., Now Struggling In Mexico

Steele suspects the latter. Because the effects are found in reading, not in math or science where there were few differences, she suggests that learning two languages makes students more aware of how language works in general, aka "metalinguistic awareness."

The research of Gigi Luk at Harvard offers a slightly different explanation. She has recently done a small study looking at a group of 100 fourth-graders in Massachusetts who had similar reading scores on a standard test, but very different language experiences.

Some were foreign-language dominant and others were English natives. Here's what's interesting. The students who were dominant in a foreign language weren't yet comfortably bilingual; they were just starting to learn English. Therefore, by definition, they had much weaker English vocabularies than the native speakers.

Yet they were just as good at decoding a text.

"This is very surprising," Luk says. "You would expect the reading comprehension performance to mirror vocabulary — it's a cornerstone of comprehension."

How did the foreign-language dominant speakers manage this feat? Well, Luk found, they also scored higher on tests of executive functioning. So, even though they didn't have huge mental dictionaries to draw on, they may have been great puzzle-solvers, taking into account higher-level concepts such as whether a single sentence made sense within an overall story line.

They got to the same results as the monolinguals, by a different path.

School performance and engagement.

Wayne Thomas and Virginia Collier, a husband and wife team of professors emeritus at George Mason University in Virginia, have spent the past 30 years collecting evidence on the benefits of bilingual education.

"Wayne came to our research with skepticism, thinking students ought to get instruction all day in English," says Virginia Collier. "Eight million student records later, we're convinced," Wayne Thomas chimes in.

In studies covering six states and 37 districts, they have found that, compared with students in English-only classrooms or in one-way immersion, dual-language students have somewhat higher test scores and also seem to be happier in school. Attendance is better, behavioral problems fewer, parent involvement higher.

Diversity and integration.

American public school classrooms as a whole are becoming more segregated by race and class. Dual-language programs can be an exception. Because they are composed of native English speakers deliberately placed together with recent immigrants, they tend to be more ethnically and socioeconomically balanced. And there is some evidence that this helps kids of all backgrounds gain comfort with diversity and different cultures.

Several of the researchers I talked with also pointed out that, in bilingual education, non-English-dominant students and their families tend to feel that their home language is heard and valued, compared with a classroom where the home language is left at the door in favor of English.

This can improve students' sense of belonging and increase parent involvement in their children's education, including behaviors like reading to children.

"Many parents fear their language is an obstacle, a problem, and if they abandon it their child will integrate better," says Antonella Sorace of the University of Edinburgh. "We tell them they're not doing their child a favor by giving up their language."

Protection against cognitive decline and dementia.

File this away as a very, very long-range payoff. Researchers have found that actively using two languages seems to have a protective effect against age-related dementia — perhaps relating to the changes in brain structure we talked about earlier.

Specifically, among patients with Alzheimer's in a Canadian study, a group of bilingual adults performed on par with a group of monolingual adults in terms of cognitive tests and daily functioning. But when researchers looked at the two groups' brains, they found evidence of brain atrophy that was five to seven years more advanced in the bilingual group. In other words, the adults who spoke two languages were carrying on longer at a higher level despite greater degrees of damage.

The coda, and a caution

One theme that was striking in speaking to all these researchers was just how strongly they advocated for dual-language classrooms.

Thomas and Collier have advised many school systems on how to expand their dual-language programs, and Sorace runs " Bilingualism Matters ," an international network of researchers who promote bilingual education projects.

This type of advocacy among scientists is unusual; even more so because the "bilingual advantage hypothesis" is being challenged once again. A review of studies published last year found that cognitive advantages failed to appear in 83 percent of published studies, though in a separate meta-analysis, the sum of effects was still significantly positive.

One potential explanation offered by the researchers I spoke with is that advantages that are measurable in the very young and very old tend to fade when testing young adults at the peak of their cognitive powers.

And, they countered that no negative effects of bilingual education have been found. So, they argue that even if the advantages are small, they are still worth it.

Not to mention one obvious, outstanding fact underlined by many of these researchers: "Bilingual children can speak two languages! That's amazing," says Bialystok.

• Executive Board
• Strategic Plan
• Special Interest Groups
• NABE Bylaws
• Annual Report
• NABE History
• Past Presidents
• Seal of Biliteracy
• My Name, My Identity
• Nabe Partners
• Digital Badges
• Project PARA NIÑOS
• Project PARA TODOS
• Bilingual Research Journal
• NABE JOURNAL OF RESEARCH & PRACTICE (NJRP)
• NABE global perspectives magazine
• Member Login

Welcome to the National Association for Bilingual Education

Since 1975, the National Association for Bilingual Education (NABE) has been a non-profit membership organization that works to advocate for educational equity and excellence for bilingual/multilingual students in a global society.

NABE 2024 Sponsors

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Bilingual education in China: a qualitative synthesis of research on models and perceptions

Bilingual education has become increasingly popular in China, with a subsequent growth in research, particularly research with a qualitative component that examines learners’ and teachers’ experiences and perspectives. These studies have mostly been conducted in individual classroom settings where contexts and learners differ, making findings less transferrable to other educational settings. To address this need, we conducted a qualitative synthesis of research that aims to provide a holistic and rich description of bilingual education in China. Our focus is on the implementation of bilingual education in different educational contexts, learners’ and teachers’ perceptions of bilingual education, and the research instruments used for the evaluation of bilingual education. Following a discipline-specific methodological framework for conducting qualitative research synthesis (Chong, Sin Wang & Luke Plonsky. 2021. A primer on qualitative research synthesis in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 55(3). 1024–1034), we identified suitable studies using a pre-determined search string within various databases. Search results were screened based on a set of inclusion criteria and relevant information was extracted from the included studies using a piloted data extraction form. The extracted data were synthesised using grounded theory to identify new themes and sub-themes. Our findings point to the need for more fine-grained classifications of bilingual education models, despite the fact that Chinese learners generally show positive attitudes towards bilingual education. The study ends with an analysis of limitations, as well as recommendations for future research and practice.

1 Introduction

Bilingual education refers to the use of two languages as the media of instruction ( García 2009 ). The reason bilingual education is prevalent nowadays is twofold: globalization creates needs for bilinguals who are proficient users of more than one language; bilingual education facilitates intercultural communication and widens the cognitive capacity of individuals ( Jawad 2021 ). The rise of Chinese bilingual education stemmed from its open-door policy in 1978 ( Gao and Wang 2017 ). At that time, English was taught as a subject, but learners were incapable of using the language in real-life contexts. Thus, there was growing dissatisfaction with the traditional methods of English language teaching in China, which predominantly used the first language (L1) of learners. Under the influence of bilingual education implementation in other countries, for example, immersion in Canada and dual-way bilingual education in the United States, China began to adopt and adapt various models of bilingual education. Simultaneously, the Ministry of Education (MOE) called for a reform in English language teaching in universities to improve the communication skills of university learners by promoting bilingual education in China ( MOE 2005 ). In 2021 , MOE amended the education law, which mentioned that schools and institutions in ethnic autonomous regions and ethnic minorities should use indigenous languages to implement bilingual education while the government would provide additional support for minority learners.

Although the implementation of bilingual education varies across China, research remains piecemeal, especially regarding learners’ and teachers’ experiences. Thus, there is a need for a qualitative synthesis of research findings that focuses on issues pertaining to implementation (how bilingual education is implemented by teachers and experienced by learners), perceptions (learners’ and teachers’ attitudes towards bilingual education), and evaluation (research tools used to evaluate the effectiveness of bilingual education) of bilingual education in China. These issues will be discussed in light of the synthesised findings.

2 Literature review

2.1 defining ‘bilingual education’.

García and Lin (2017) define bilingual education as the use of diverse languages to teach. Jawad (2021) put forward the Separate Underlying Proficiency and Common Underlying Proficiency models to refer to the interrelationship between the two languages used by bilinguals. The separate Underlying Proficiency model, which influenced the early development of bilingual education, posits that bilinguals’ proficiency and knowledge of the two languages are discrete entities, each with a limited capacity for storage, while the Common Underlying Proficiency model, representing a more dynamic view towards the confluence between the use of two languages by bilinguals, indicates that the two languages are inseparable from a cognitive perspective.

A few terms are usually confused with bilingual education, for example, trilingualism, multilingualism, monolingualism, and plurilingualism. Monolingualism refers to speaking only one language or having active knowledge of one language and passive knowledge of other languages ( Ellis 2006 ). Multilingualism could be seen as an individual’s ability and language use in society ( Edwards 2012 ). According to Cenoz (2013) , multilingualism can include bilingualism and trilingualism. Piccardo (2018) mentioned multilingualism refers to the knowledge of multiple languages in society. Plurilingualism means that individuals could acquire languages simultaneously from exposure to multiple languages, and it is also sometimes defined as individual multilingualism ( Cenoz 2013 ). Piccardo (2018) mentioned that plurilingualism is the interrelation between languages associated with dynamic language acquisition. In other words, a classroom with learners speaking different mother tongues is multilingual, while a class where teachers and learners adopt strategies that celebrate linguistic diversity to maximize communication is a plurilingual classroom ( Piccardo 2018 ). Trilingualism is a branch and extension of bilingualism ( Anastassiou et al. 2017 ), which refers to multilingual speakers gradually obtaining the ability to communicate in different languages. For example, people being exposed to three languages from birth and being able to use three languages in writing and orally can be called trilingual. Hoffmann (2001) mentioned that there is no clear distinction between bilingualism and multilingualism, and multilingualism can be seen as a variant of bilingualism. However, Aronin (2005) indicated that the notions of trilingualism and multilingualism are interchangeable. Dewaele (2015) indicated that people who learn a variety of languages may develop multicompetence. Specifically, grammatical and lexical competence of a learner may be influenced by multicompetence ( Dewaele 2015 ). In terms of cultural awareness, bilinguals and multilingual are more receptive to cultural differences than monolinguals.

2.2 Bilingual education practices in the U.S., Canada, and China

Whilst bilingual education is adopted in different ways in many countries around the world, the U.S. and Canada are the pioneers in bilingual education and their models serve as the foundation for various forms of bilingual education in other countries. In Canada, immersion refers to the creation of a learning environment that is rich in the target language; however, the use of L1 is still acceptable in immersion. Ultimately, immersion does not expect learners to develop native-like competence in the target language ( Beardsmore 1995 ). Dicks and Genesee (2017) discussed three forms of immersion in Canada: French immersion, heritage language programs, and indigenous language programs. French immersion is for both the majority of learners speaking English and learners with minority backgrounds ( Dicks and Genesee 2017 ). French immersion is popular in Canada because French and English are the official languages of the country and they are protected in the education system since the adoption of the Multiculturalism Act of 1988 ( Dicks and Genesee 2017 ).

Regarding bilingual education in the U.S., dual language immersion programs are usually adopted to provide equitable education for ethnic minorities ( Bybee et al. 2014 ; Collier 1995 ). Osorio-O’Dea (2001) compared different bilingual education programs in the U.S. including English as a second language immersion, and transitional and two-way bilingual education. In terms of bilingual education in China, Lin (1997) and Geary and Pan (2003) , investigated bilingual education policies and practices for Chinese ethnic minorities. Similarly, Gao and Wang (2017) discussed two types of bilingual education programs in China. They are the government-led bilingual education programs for ethnic minorities and the Chinese-English bilingual education programs ( Gao and Ren 2019 ; Gao and Wang 2017 ). However, the studies above about bilingual education in China only mentioned little about the preferences for bilingual education models. Although the number of studies on bilingual education in China has been on the rise in recent years, most of them only focus on a specific region (e.g., Shanghai in Wei 2013 ). It remains unclear how bilingual education is implemented in different regions in China. Equally, a thorough understanding of how Chinese teachers and learners think about bilingual education remains to be unravelled. Thus, our review intends to address these gaps and shed light on the preferences for bilingual education models, and perceptions of teachers and learners towards bilingual education in China.

3 Methodology

We adopted a qualitative synthesis of research as the methodology of this review ( Chong and Plonsky 2021 ; Chong and Reinders 2021 ; Chong et al. 2023 in this special issue). The rationale for its adoption is that the 16 included publications are small-scale studies, making findings in these studies less transferrable due to the limited number of interviews and the small sample size. Despite the insightfulness of the findings of these studies, their ability to shed new light on bilingual education within other contexts is limited. Additionally, qualitative synthesis of research is a systematic and rigorous methodology to provide a reliable representation of the state-of-the-art of a research topic using a systematic approach ( Chong and Reinders 2021 ). The rationale for synthesising qualitative data is that it can provide a rich description of the current situation of bilingual education in China, as well as on the perceptions of different stakeholders, such as teachers and learners.

To assure quality in the process of synthesis, the first author kept a researcher logbook to record the disagreements and how we resolved them, which not only shows reflexivity but also acts as a mechanism to ensure the quality in each stage (see Supplementary Material online). Reflexivity is what we intended to highlight in the process, which is concerned with what we disagreed, why we disagreed, and how we resolved the disagreement. A reflexive approach, in our opinion, is a much richer and more informative approach than calculating inter-coder reliability.

For the present study, we drew on a methodological framework for conducting qualitative research synthesis in TESOL ( Chong and Plonsky 2021 ; see Figure 1 ). The rationale for employing this framework is that it comprises multiple methodological stages that can be used to guide the review process, contributing to transparency and systematicity, and in the future, replicability, of the process of identifying, extracting, and synthesising relevant qualitative data.

A methodological framework for conducting qualitative research synthesis in TESOL ( Chong and Plonsky 2021 , p. 1027).

3.1 Design research questions

How is bilingual education implemented in China?

What do Chinese teachers and learners think about bilingual education?

How is bilingual education in China evaluated in research?

3.2 Keywords identified for conducting the literature search

Our focus is on “bilingual education”. As Chong and Plonsky (2021) mentioned, interchangeable words should be taken into consideration. Thus, “immersion”, “translanguaging” and “plurilingual*” were chosen as keywords. Based on these keywords, the following search string was developed and used to perform the search for this review:

(“bilingual education” OR “bilingual*” OR “translanguaging” OR “immersion” OR “plurilingual*”) AND (“China” OR “Chinese”)

3.3 Literature search conducted

We searched for studies in an exploratory way ( Chong and Reinders 2020 ). The search was conducted in the following databases in March 2022: Web of Science, Scopus, and ERIC. The rationale for choosing these databases is twofold: (1) they can process the search strings verbatim; (2) Scopus and Web of Science allow for considerable length of the search queries to up to 1,000 terms ( Gusenbauer and Haddaway 2020 ). Thus, ERIC, Scopus, and Web of Science are deemed appropriate databases to provide accurate and comprehensive search results.

The first author initially filtered the studies following the steps listed in Chong and Reinders (2020 ; see Figure 2 ). We selected ‘Title’ and ‘Abstract’, listed all relevant articles, browsed through all titles and abstracts, and included all articles that matched the inclusion criteria. In total, 384 articles were included (see Figure 3 ). One hundred and nine articles with irrelevant contexts (research in a country other than China), 103 articles with irrelevant topics, 94 duplicate articles, and 26 secondary studies were excluded in the pre-screening and screening stages. After excluding these 332 articles, four of the remaining 52 articles were inaccessible, resulting in 48 articles.

Searching and first-screening articles ( Chong and Reinders 2022 , p. 6).

Flow chart of study selection (based on Page et al. 2021 ).

3.4 Evaluate literature using inclusion criteria

The second screening followed the inclusion criteria in Table 1 . The search frame was between 2018 and 2022, which provides the latest primary research on bilingual education. Particularly, we focused on primary studies because we are interested in the implementation of bilingual education in China, not just the theories that underpin the concept of bilingual education. We only included publications written in English because we are affiliated with UK universities, and we can mainly access publications written in English. We acknowledge that there are some high-quality publications written in languages other than English that were excluded, which is one of the limitations of this review.

Inclusion criteria of the QRS.

Following the search process (see Figure 3 ), We downloaded all 48 articles, of which we excluded three articles that do not contain an explicit section that discusses bilingual education, 14 articles with irrelevant research questions, eight studies in areas other than in mainland China, one secondary study, one study about Chinese as a second language and foreign language respectively, and four duplicate articles. Sixteen studies were included in this qualitative synthesis of research.

3.5 Data extraction and synthesis

With the 16 included studies, information related to the research questions was extracted into a form adapted from Chong and Reinders’ (2022) (see Appendix I ). The first author analysed and categorised the articles (see Figure 4 ). Twelve of the 16 articles were about Chinese-English bilingual education, and the remaining four were about bilingual education in minority languages (e.g., Mongolian) and Chinese. After co-developing the data extraction form with the second author, who is experienced in conducting research synthesis in language education, the first author extracted three studies using the extraction form and they were checked by the second author to ensure accurate data were extracted. After receiving feedback, the first author began to extract the remaining studies. The completed 16 data extraction forms were reviewed by both authors independently. Queries related to the extracted information were discussed and resolved during a series of bi-weekly face-to-face meetings that spanned across two months. After completing the 16 extraction forms, we produced an overview form summarising the 16 studies (see Appendix II ), which consists of contexts, types of bilingual education (e.g., translanguaging, immersion), research methods, and findings to provide a holistic view of the included studies.

Analysis procedure of the 16 studies.

Based on the 16 extracted forms and the overview form, we synthesised the background information of 16 studies (e.g., research questions, methods, participants, locations) and the three research questions. The synthesis was conducted using grounded theory ( Thornberg et al. 2014 ), as it is an inductive analytical approach, building data-driven conceptual understanding, which accords with the purpose of this study; that is, to identify bilingual education models and stakeholders’ perceptions towards bilingual education in China. We collated data from included studies to extraction forms with different focuses (research questions, research methods, participants, locations) and developed concepts and categories for each term in an inductive way. The study generated descriptive and conceptual categories through initial, focused, and axial coding (see Appendix III ). In this study, the first author coded the 16 extraction forms line-by-line in the initial coding phase. Then, descriptive categories were developed to classify the extracted information in the focused coding phase. Finally, the related descriptive categories were combined into one conceptual category in the axial coding stage. The first author met with the second author bi-weekly to discuss every coding stage and at times they had discussions on the challenges the first author had. In the meetings, the second author also reviewed a sample of the coded data and offered feedback and suggestions when necessary. We have prepared a narrative summary of the meetings that we had concerning data extraction and synthesis, as well as photos of the notes that the second author took during the meeting (see Supplementary Material online).

4 Findings and discussion

4.1 background information of the 16 studies.

There are 41 research questions in the 16 studies, which are classified into two categories, internal and external focuses. Internal focus is endorsed by 27 research questions about teachers’ and learners’ perceptions, and bilingual practices. It consists of six conceptual categories. Of the six categories, there are 11 questions about perceptions and practices (e.g., Wang 2021 ). There are seven questions about the effectiveness of bilingual education for learners (e.g., Wang 2021 ), and four questions about the difference in learners’ performance under different bilingual practices (e.g., Yu et al. 2019 ). Three questions are about the adaptability of bilingual education in different contexts (e.g., Xiong and Feng 2018 ). Only one question is about the role of teachers in translanguaging ( Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ) and teaching or learning strategies in bilingual education respectively ( Zhou and Mann 2021 ).

On the other hand, the external focus of the research questions is about external environments or contexts (endorsed by 15 research questions), which consisted of five conceptual categories. Eight of the questions are about external factors that influence the implementation of bilingual education. For example, Yang (2018) referred to a question about the factors affecting the quality of bilingual teaching. There are three questions about reflections and recommendations for the implementation of bilingual education (e.g., Hiller 2021 ). It is closely followed by questions about the relationship between environment and achievement (endorsed by two research questions) ( Wang and Lehtomäki 2022 ). Unique characteristics in the Chinese context ( Xiong and Feng 2018 ) and the assessment of bilingual education ( *Yang 2018 ) were the research questions in two studies. Coding of research questions of the 16 studies is shown in Appendix III .

In terms of research methods, nine studies adopted mixed methods by conducting questionnaires, class observations, surveys, tests, documents, field notes, interviews, and focus groups (e.g., Wang 2021 ). Four studies used qualitative research methods such as classroom observations, videotaping, field notes, documents, and interviews (e.g., Guo 2022 ), while only three studies used quantitative research methods, that is, questionnaires (e.g., Wang et al. 2018 ).

As for participants in the 16 studies, 11 studies had mature language learners from higher education institutions (e.g., Wang 2021 ) who are able to provide more in-depth and accurate reflection on their own learning experiences. These were followed by learners in primary schools ( n  = 3) (e.g., Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ) [1] and secondary schools ( n  = 3) (e.g., Xiong and Feng 2018 ).

As for location, seven studies were conducted in eastern China. Notably, the seven studies conducted in eastern areas of China were all about English-Chinese bilingual education. Seven studies were conducted in western China, four of which were about minority languages and Mandarin. Western areas are usually less economically developed areas in China and the introduction of Mandarin remains a challenge. It is worth noting that Zuo and Walsh (2021) conducted the study in two schools located in an eastern city and a southwestern city respectively. *Wang and Curdt-Christiansen (2019) noted that the study was conducted in the central region of China. The remaining two studies did not mention the location.

4.2 Findings and discussion based on the research questions

4.2.1 rq1 – how is bilingual education implemented in china.

The included studies reported four conceptual categories (see Figure 5 ), including translanguaging ( n  = 7), immersion ( n  = 3), learner-centred bilingual education ( n  = 1), and five studies without specifying the type(s) of bilingual education. The coding scheme of the implementation of bilingual education is shown in Appendix IV .

Types of bilingual education in 16 studies.

Among the seven studies about translanguaging (see Figure 6 ), two studies are about ‘translanguaging with content-based instruction (CBI)’ ( Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ; Wang 2021 ), which emphasized the significance of understanding subject-specific content. CBI classes include the instruction of subject content and language-related activities, and teachers are required to teach both content knowledge and the second language (L2) ( Wang 2021 ). Similarly, complex content-based concepts were explained using two languages in Troedson and Dashwood (2018) . There are also two studies about ‘translanguaging in English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom’ ( Guo 2022 ; Zuo and Walsh 2021 ). One study is about ‘translanguaging in English for academic purposes (EAP)’ ( Hiller 2021 ), ‘translanguaging in content and language integrated learning (CLIL)’ ( Zhou and Mann 2021 ), and ‘translanguaging practices’ ( Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ) respectively. Specifically, EAP teachers designed writing tasks that employed translanguaging; for example, a short paper for discussing an important Chinese cultural notion ( Hiller 2021 ). In CLIL classrooms, a theme-based reading course was conducted to develop learners’ language proficiency and content knowledge in Zhou and Mann (2021) . In this study, translanguaging was implemented with three strategies: explanatory strategies, attention-raising strategies, and rapport-building strategies . Explanatory strategies refer to the textbook content explained in a combination of English and Chinese; attention-raising strategies refer to translanguaging being employed to raise learners’ attention to important teaching points; Rapport-building strategies are usually adopted on two occasions: teachers intend to keep the natural flow of interaction when learners are unable to understand concepts; teachers participate in learners’ group discussions when they overwhelmingly rely on their L1 ( Zhou and Mann 2021 ).

Sub-types of bilingual education.

Similarly, four translanguaging practices were adopted by Wang and Curdt-Christiansen (2019) : bilingual label quest, simultaneous code-mixing, cross-language recapping, and dual-language substantiation . Bilingual label quest refers to adopting the labels in another language to show the concepts in one language ( Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ). Simultaneous code-mixing refers to the use of Chinese and English in meaning-making ( Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ). Cross-language recapping refers to repeating the course content in another language, which has been taught in one language ( Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ). The major difference between cross-language recapping and bilingual label quest lies in the fact that the latter only focuses on concepts. The fourth practice is dual-language substantiation , referring to the co-construction of knowledge based on two languages ( Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ).

Among the three studies about immersion ( Wang et al. 2018 ; Xiong and Feng 2018 ; Yao 2022 ; see Figure 6 ), one study is subsumed under ‘dominant use of English in class’, which means English is used as the medium of instruction while the use of Mandarin (L1) is allowed ( Xiong and Feng 2018 ); the other two studies are coded as ‘one-way immersion’. In one-way immersion classes, L1 is forbidden in the class, and teachers are only allowed to speak in English ( Fleckenstein et al. 2019 ; Yao 2022 ). Similarly, Chinese learners are also taught in English in Wang et al. (2018) .

One study is grouped under ‘learner-centred bilingual education’ ( Figure 6 ) ( Yu et al. 2019 ). Yu et al. (2019) did not point out explicitly the type of bilingual education, but they introduced three teaching modes used in Mongolia for fluent bilinguals, limited bilinguals, and Mandarin monolinguals respectively. The reason these three teaching modes are labelled as ‘learner-centred bilingual education’ is that three teaching modes are implemented according to learners’ abilities and levels. Fluent bilinguals’ teaching mode refers to learners being taught in Mongolian and Chinese as a subject ( Yu et al. 2019 ). On the contrary, limited bilinguals’ teaching mode means learners being taught in Chinese, while the heritage language, Mongolian, is the subject. The teaching mode used for Mandarin monolinguals refers to Chinese being used as the only language in class ( Yu et al. 2019 ).

The above findings suggest that bilingual education is a rather loose pedagogical concept rather than specific approach(es) to language teaching. According to Wang (2010) , the definition of bilingual education is loose because the understandings of what bilingual education constitutes range widely. It is demonstrated in the fact that five studies (31.25%) did not mention the types of bilingual education (see Figure 6 ) but used the overarching term ‘bilingual education’ in the studies (e.g., Yang 2018 ). Specifically, two of these studies ( Li 2018 ; Wang and Lehtomäki 2022 ) described the pedagogical approach used to teach the target language without referring to a specific type of bilingual education, such as immersion. The other three did not mention how bilingual education was implemented in their studies at all ( Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ; Wang et al. 2021 ; Yang 2018 ). Additionally, a more well-refined categorisation should be applied in bilingual education because there are five studies that do not specify type(s) of bilingual education. According to Azzam (2019) , factors such as contexts and desired outcomes should be taken into consideration to define new types of bilingual education.

Bilingual education programs mentioned in the 16 studies were implemented for different durations ( Appendix V ) and using different materials ( Appendix VI ). Four studies mention the duration of the bilingual education program (e.g., Guo 2022 ), of which two studies implemented bilingual education for less than 50 h (i.e., 48 h in Guo 2022 , and 38 h in Li 2018 ) and the other two studies implemented bilingual education for over 50 h (i.e., a two-year period in Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 , and 13 days in Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ). The other 12 studies did not specify the duration of the bilingual education program. Regarding materials, three studies introduce the materials used in the programs, including the textbook Gogo Loves English in Guo (2022) , a Chinese textbook published in 2006 ( Li 2018 ), and a textbook with philosophical and scientific knowledge in Rehamo and Harrell (2018) . The other 13 studies did not mention any materials used (e.g., Wang 2021 ). From a practitioner’s perspective, teachers’ primary concern is the materials that can be used to teach bilingual classes and the duration of a bilingual program. However, such information is absent from the majority of the included studies. Similar to our earlier observation about types of bilingual education, researchers appear to adopt the term ‘bilingual education’ quite loosely without providing an operational definition that reflects how it is practised. Hew et al. (2019) , while focusing on research on educational technology, indicated that research that is under-theorised may have limited relevance to scholarship and practice.

4.2.2 RQ2 – How do the Chinese teachers and learners think about bilingual education?

Three studies report teachers’ view that learners benefit from bilingual education ( Guo 2022 ; Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ; Xiong and Feng 2018 ), and only one study reports that teachers think it is challenging to implement bilingual education ( Wang 2021 ), while the remaining 12 studies do not discuss teachers’ perspectives at all (e.g., Li 2018 ; Yang 2018 ). Among the three studies coded as ‘bilingual education benefits learners’, two studies are about how translanguaging helps learners to self-improve ( Guo 2022 ; Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ) and one study is about ways that immersion helps with learners’ performance ( Xiong and Feng 2018 ). Specifically, in Troedson and Dashwood (2018) and Guo (2022) , teachers indicate that translanguaging helps learners understand materials, develop critical thinking, and express themselves. Teachers in Wang (2021) find it difficult to insist on the use of English in group discussions or in-class activities among learners. Teachers mention that learners always revert from English to Chinese ( Wang 2021 ). To sum up, teachers’ perceptions toward bilingual education are largely ignored and learners are the main stakeholders in the included studies. It is important to consider the views of other stakeholders in future research to develop a more holistic understanding of bilingual education and other educational issues ( Bond et al. 2021 ). The coding scheme of teachers’ perceptions is presented in Appendix VII and the analysis of the teachers’ perceptions is shown in Figure 7 .

Teachers’ perceptions towards bilingual education.

As for learners’ perceptions, seven studies mention ‘approval of bilingual education’ (e.g., Wang 2021 ), while two studies show ‘disapproval of bilingual education’ ( Yang 2018 ; Yao 2022 ), and one study shows ‘the factor affecting usefulness of bilingual education’ ( Wang et al. 2018 ) and ‘mixed perceptions’ ( Zhou and Mann 2021 ) of learners respectively. The other five studies do not mention learners’ perceptions (e.g., Zuo and Walsh 2021 ). Bilingual education is conducive to learners in various ways. For example, learners benefit from better employment prospects, further study opportunities ( Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ), and better comprehension of content being taught ( Guo 2022 ). However, two studies show ‘disapproval of bilingual education’ ( Yang 2018 ; Yao 2022 ). Specifically, about 33% of learners in Yang (2018) have difficulties comprehending content in two languages and following teaching schedules; most learners in Yao (2022) indicate that bilingual education is costly and detrimental to their confidence. Aside from this, learners in Yang (2018) express that poor practices of bilingual teaching make language learning stressful. *Wang et al. (2018) points out that the English proficiency of learners affects bilingual education. Additionally, Zhou and Mann (2021) present mixed perceptions toward bilingual education, in which 72% of learners believe bilingual education negatively affects their language choice. The other five studies did not mention how learners perceive bilingual education (e.g., Zuo and Walsh 2021 ). The coding scheme of learners’ perceptions is shown in Appendix VIII , and the analysis of learners’ perceptions is shown in Figure 8 .

Learners’ perceptions towards bilingual education.

Focusing on learners’ perceptions, we investigated the benefits and challenges of bilingual education discussed in the 16 studies. Ten studies mentioned the benefits of bilingual education. Among the ten studies, five studies mentioned bilingual education is conducive to learners’ mastery of content and language (e.g., Wang 2021 ). Specifically, Wang (2021) mentioned that bilingual education can develop a deeper comprehension of the content without the pressure of using two languages simultaneously and facilitate learners’ acquisition of the target language. In a similar vein, learners in Troedson and Dashwood (2018) indicated that bilingual education can develop the target language. Wang and Curdt-Christiansen (2019) showed that bilingual education can facilitate disciplinary learning, and learners perform better than monolinguals ( Xiong and Feng 2018 ). Additionally, learners’ self-improvement was mentioned by three studies (e.g., Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ), in particular, cognitive development and confidence. Provision of resources ( n  = 2) ( Hiller 2021 ; Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ) includes communicative resources and linguistic resources. Bilingual education helps learners maintain interactions between minority culture and mainstream society ( n  = 2) ( Wang and Lehtomäki 2022 ; Yu et al. 2019 ). Preserving heritage culture and language was mentioned by one study ( Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ). The remaining six studies did not mention the benefits of bilingual education (e.g., Yang 2018 ). The coding scheme of the benefits of bilingual education is shown in Appendix IX .

Challenges of bilingual education were divided into two categories: challenges resulted from contextual factors and learner factors. Among the 16 included studies, contextual factors were mentioned by five studies (e.g., Wang 2021 ). First, the dominance of monolingual education and stereotypical view towards bilingual education hamper the implementation of bilingual education ( n  = 2) ( Wang 2021 ; Yang 2018 ). The mismatch between bilingual education and societal needs ( n  = 3) ( Wang et al. 2018 ; Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ; Yao 2022 ). The challenges of bilingual education are also caused by learner factors ( n  = 14). Firstly, learners’ needs in bilingual education are largely ignored ( n  = 3) ( Guo 2022 ; Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ; Yang 2018 ). Then, bilingual education is expensive for learners from rural areas, which causes a financial burden on learners and their families ( n  = 2) ( Wang et al. 2018 ; Yao 2022 ). Other factors include that learners lack a solid language foundation and knowledge ( n  = 2) ( Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ; Wang et al. 2021 ), lack of confidence ( n  = 1) ( Yao 2022 ), and lack of incentives ( n  = 1) ( Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ). Additionally, the effectiveness of bilingual education is affected by teaching and learning factors, such as learners’ attitudes, teachers’ language proficiency level, assessment methods, and teaching methods ( n  = 2) ( Li 2018 ; Yang 2018 ). Learners’ insufficient communication in activities among peers ( n  = 2) (Wang 2018; Wang and Curdt-Christiansen 2019 ), and insufficient teacher training ( n  = 1) ( Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ) are the other two challenges. The other seven articles did not introduce challenges of bilingual education (e.g., Troedson and Dashwood 2018 ). The coding scheme of the challenges of bilingual education is shown in Appendix X .

4.2.3 RQ3 – How is bilingual education in China evaluated in research?

There are 11 studies coded under ‘perceptual’ (e.g., Wang 2021 ), which refers to the use of evaluation tools that focus on the perceptions of participants. Two studies evaluate learners’ ‘performance’ (in language tests) ( Wang et al. 2021 ; Yu et al. 2019 ). The remaining three studies are about ‘perception and performance’ ( Li 2018 ; Rehamo and Harrell 2018 ; Xiong and Feng 2018 ). A possible reason for researchers to adopt more perceptual evaluation tools is that improvement in performance, as reflected in the scores in language tests, would not be noticeable in the short run. In the two studies that specify the duration of bilingual education, the practice was implemented for less than 50 h ( Guo 2022 ; Li 2018 ). This shows that bilingual education was implemented as a short-term practice rather than longitudinally. Another reason may be that 11 studies (68.75%) focus on university language learners (e.g., Wang 2021 ). Learners in higher education are more mature and can provide more accurate responses about their perceptions towards bilingual education. According to Bond et al. (2021) , the reason perceptions of stakeholders are usually evaluated in lieu of actual learning behaviour or grade differences is because the former is easier to be carried out. The associated coding scheme can be found in Appendix XI .

Eight studies adopted questionnaires (e.g., Wang 2021 ), followed by seven studies using interviews (e.g., Yao 2022 ). Questionnaires and interviews are the two tools most frequently used, which results in 11 studies focusing on participants’ perceptions. Six studies adopted class observation (e.g., Guo 2022 ) and four studies adopted tests (e.g., Li 2018 ). Particularly, among the eight studies that use questionnaires, Wang (2021) adopted open questions about the intersection between CBI and translanguaging. Similarly, Yang (2018) also included an open question in the questionnaire about the opinions about bilingual teaching. Interviews were carried out in Yang (2018) about the different attitudes toward bilingual education among learners with varied English levels. As for tests, Li (2018) adopted Gates-MacGinitie Reading Comprehension Test and Gates-MacGinitie Vocabulary Test (pp. 902–903). They were used to measure learners’ reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge by providing short passages with multiple-choice questions and asking learners to identify target words among items with similar meanings. The findings of most of the included studies suggest that bilingual education in China is largely effective. However, the research tools used to gauge its effectiveness focus on specific language skills (e.g., reading) rather than learners’ holistic linguistic competence. As Gibb (2015) mentioned, assessment of the four language skills (i.e., listening, reading, writing, speaking) is critiqued because it reduces language to an individualised task where communication is largely ignored, that is, ignoring the integration of social conditions involved in the use of skills. Thus, assessment of holistic linguistic competence (e.g., communicative competence) is viewed to be more contextualised than assessment of the four language skills in isolation. The coding scheme of evaluation mechanism is presented in Appendix XII .

5 Conclusion

The findings show that translanguaging and immersion are the two types of bilingual education most prevalently implemented in the 16 studies focused on bilingual education in China. Learners’ and teachers’ perceptions are the two stakeholders most frequently mentioned, in which the former is largely positive while the latter is less mentioned among the 16 studies. Additionally, most studies focus on evaluating the effectiveness of bilingual education in relation to stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences, for instance, through semi-structured interviews.

Based on the reported findings and discussion, we offer recommendations to researchers and practitioners. For researchers, a more refined categorization of bilingual education needs to be adopted in future studies. To ensure future research on bilingual education in China is ecologically valid, it is crucial to clarify and define the type of bilingual education being studied in future studies. Equally important, researchers should strive to document how bilingual education is implemented including its duration, materials used, and lesson activities. Secondly, in addition to learners’ perspectives, researchers could focus more on the perceptions of teachers and other stakeholders including parents in future studies. The current research base emphasizes learners’ perceptions, while neglecting those of teachers and other stakeholders. In addition to teachers, other stakeholders should also be taken into consideration, such as, principals, and policymakers ( Bond et al. 2021 ). Other stakeholders’ opinions are vital to shedding a more comprehensive light on bilingual education. Third, longitudinal research and more diverse language proficiency tests can be adopted in future studies to evaluate the effectiveness of bilingual education. Most of the included studies are short-lived ( Guo 2022 ; Li 2018 ), which may affect the evaluation of the effectiveness of bilingual education. Additionally, the evaluation mechanism in current bilingual education studies in China focuses more on learners’ performance in reading in lieu of other language skills. A more holistic assessment of learners’ linguistic competence in the target language needs to be included to fully gauge the usefulness of bilingual education.

For practitioners, our synthesised findings reveal that teachers need to receive adequate training to ensure effective implementation of bilingual education. The quality of bilingual education is determined by teachers’ understanding of bilingual education and their own experience as learners. Yang (2018) shows that learners are overburdened because the quality of bilingual education is unsatisfying, and Wang et al. (2018) indicated that the poor quality of bilingual education results from teachers’ limited language proficiency. Teacher training is conducive to teachers’ professional and language development, which are essential to improving the quality of bilingual education in China.

This research synthesis is not without limitations. The inclusion of only 16 studies may not fully capture the current situation of bilingual education in China. For example, the current study only focuses on primary studies about bilingual education rather than secondary studies, which may result in excluding other important work in this area of research. It also only includes studies indexed in three databases and, as the topic is on bilingual education in China, it is likely that some publications are published in Chinese, which is beyond the scope of this review. As a result, future studies could include more studies by setting a longer time frame and include publications in other languages.

Acknowledgement

This qualitative synthesis of research is based on the MSc TESOL dissertation written by QL. SWC was QL’s supervisor who oversaw the conception and implementation of the research process. Both QL and SWC were involved in the writing of this publication.

The references that are asterisked (*) are those that are included in this qualitative synthesis of research. Search in Google Scholar

Anastassiou, Fotini, Georgia Andreou & Maria Liakou. 2017. Third language learning, trilingualism and multilingualism: A review. European Journal of English Language, Linguistic and Literature 4(1). 61–73. Search in Google Scholar

Aronin, Larissa. 2005. Theoretical perspectives of trilingual education. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 171. 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2005.2005.171.7 . Search in Google Scholar

Azzam, Ziad. 2019. Dubai’s private K-12 education sector: In search of bilingual education. Journal of Research in International Education 18(3). 227–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240919892424 . Search in Google Scholar

Beardsmore, Hugo Baetens. 1995. European models of bilingual education: Practice, theory and development. In Policy and practice in bilingual education: A reader extending the foundations , 139–149. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. 10.1080/01434632.1993.9994523 Search in Google Scholar

Bond, Melissa, Svenja Bedenlier, Victoria I. Marín & Marion Händel. 2021. Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 18(1). 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x . Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Eric Ruiz, Kathryn I. Henderson & Roel V. Hinojosa. 2014. An overview of US bilingual education: Historical roots, legal battles, and recent trends, 138–146. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2152/45900 . Search in Google Scholar

Cenoz, Jasone. 2013. Defining multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 33. 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026719051300007X . Search in Google Scholar

Chong, Sin Wang. & H. Reinders. 2020. Technology-mediated task-based language teaching: A qualitative research synthesis. Language, Learning and Technology 24(3). 70–86. Search in Google Scholar

Chong, S. W. & Hayo Reinders. 2021. A methodological review of qualitative research syntheses in CALL: The state-of-the-art. System 103. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102646 . Search in Google Scholar

Chong, Sin Wang & Hayo Reinders. 2022. Autonomy of English language learners: A scoping review of research and practice. Language Teaching Research . 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688221075812 . Search in Google Scholar

Chong, Sin Wang & Luke Plonsky. 2021. A primer on qualitative research synthesis in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly 55(3). 1024–1034. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3030 . Search in Google Scholar

Chong, Sin Wang & Luke Plonsky. 2023. A typology of secondary research in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review . https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/msjrh . Search in Google Scholar

Collier, Virginia P. 1995. Acquiring a second language for school. Directions in Language and Education 1(4). 3–14. Search in Google Scholar

Dewaele, Jean-Marc. 2015. Bilingualism and multilingualism. In The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction , 1–11. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi108 Search in Google Scholar

Dicks, Joseph & Fred Genesee. 2017. Bilingual education in Canada. Bilingual and Multilingual Education 10. 453–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02324-3_32-1 . Search in Google Scholar

Edwards, John. 2012. Bilingualism and multilingualism: Some central concepts. In The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism , 5–25. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. 10.1002/9781118332382.ch1 Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Elizabeth. 2006. Monolingualism: The unmarked case. Estudios de Sociolingüística 7(2). 173–196. https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v7i2.173 . Search in Google Scholar

Fleckenstein, Johanna, Sandra Kristina Gebauer & Jens Möller. 2019. Promoting mathematics achievement in one-way immersion: Performance development over four years of elementary school. Contemporary Educational Psychology 56. 228–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.01.010 . Search in Google Scholar

Gao, Xuesong & Wei Ren. 2019. Controversies of bilingual education in China. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22(3). 267–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1550049 . Search in Google Scholar

Gao, Xuesong & Wei Wang. 2017. Bilingual education in the People’s Republic of China. In Bilingual and multilingual education , 219–231. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_16 Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia. 2009. Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective . Oxford: John Wiley & Sons. Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia & Angel Lin. 2017. Extending understandings of bilingual and multilingual education. In Bilingual and multilingual education , 1–20. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_1 Search in Google Scholar

Geary, D. Morman & Yongrong Pan. 2003. A bilingual education pilot project among the Kam people in Guizhou Province, China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 24(4). 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666502 . Search in Google Scholar

Gibb, Tara. 2015. Regimes of language skill and competency assessment in an age of migration: The in/visibility of social relations and practices. Studies in Continuing Education 37(3). 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2015.1043986 . Search in Google Scholar

*Guo, Haojun. 2022. Chinese primary school students’ translanguaging in EFL classrooms: What is it and why is it needed? The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher . 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-022-00644-7 . Search in Google Scholar

Gusenbauer, Michael & Neal R. Haddaway. 2020. Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods 11(2). 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378 . Search in Google Scholar

Hew, Khe Foon, Min Lan, Ying Tang, Chengyuan Jia & Chung Kwan Lo. 2019. Where is the “theory” within the field of educational technology research? British Journal of Educational Technology 50(3). 956–971. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12770 . Search in Google Scholar

*Hiller, Kristin E. 2021. Introducing translanguaging in an EAP course at a joint-venture university in China. RELC Journal 52(2). 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882211014997 . Search in Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Charlotte. 2001. Towards a description of trilingual competence. International Journal of Bilingualism 5(1). 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069010050010101 . Search in Google Scholar

Jawad, Najat A. Muttalib M. 2021. Bilingual education: Features & advantages. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 12(5). 735–740. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1205.12 . Search in Google Scholar

*Li, Miao. 2018. The effectiveness of a bilingual education program at a Chinese university: A case study of social science majors. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 21(8). 897–912. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1231164 . Search in Google Scholar

Lin, Jing. 1997. Policies and practices of bilingual education for the minorities in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 18(3). 193–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434639708666314 . Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education. 2005. Recommendations on strengthening college undergraduate programmes and enhancing the quality of instruction and Notice of Minister Zhou Ji’s Speech at the Second National Conference on Undergraduate Teaching in General Higher Education Institutions. http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A08/s7056/200501/t20050107_80315.html (accessed 6 August 2022). Search in Google Scholar

Ministry of Education. 2021. Education law of the People’s Republic of China. http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_sjzl/sjzl_zcfg/zcfg_jyfl/202107/t20210730_547843.html (accessed 7 August 2022). Search in Google Scholar

Osorio-O’Dea, Patricia. 2001. Bilingual education: An overview. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, 1–18. Available at: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1882/ . Search in Google Scholar

Page, Matthew J., Joanne E. McKenzie, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Isabelle Boutron, Tammy C. Hoffmann, Cynthia D. Mulrow & David Moher. 2021. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews 10(1). 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 . Search in Google Scholar

Piccardo, Enrica. 2018. Plurilingualism: Vision, conceptualization, and practices. Handbook of research and practice in heritage language education 207. 225. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44694-3_47 . Search in Google Scholar

*Rehamo, Aga & Stevan Harrell. 2018. Theory and practice of bilingual education in China: Lessons from Liangshan Yi autonomous prefecture. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23. 1254–1269. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1441259 . Search in Google Scholar

Thornberg, Robert, Lisa, M. & KathyCharmaz. 2014. Grounded theory. In Handbook of research methods in early childhood education research methodologies , vol. 1, 405–439. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. https://www.infoagepub.com/products/Handbook-of-Research-Methods-in-Early-Childhood-Education-vol1 . 10.1093/obo/9780199756810-0003 Search in Google Scholar

*Troedson, David Andrew & Ann Dashwood. 2018. Bilingual use of translanguaging: Chinese student satisfaction in a transnational business degree in English. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives 17(4). 113–128. Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Hao. 2010. Application of bilingual education in Chinese ESL families, 1–37. Available at: http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1793/43697 . Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, Jiajia, Jijia Zhang & Zhanling Cui. 2021. L2 verbal fluency and cognitive mechanism in bilinguals: Evidence from Tibetan–Chinese bilinguals. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 50(2). 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09730-7 . Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, Lijuan & Elina Lehtomäki. 2022. Bilingual education and beyond: How school settings shape the Chinese Yi minority’s socio-cultural attachments. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 25(6). 2256–2268. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2021.1905602 . Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, Lisong, Yatong Li, Zhongmei Wang, Shiyu Shu, Yun Zhang & Yulian Wu. 2018. Improved English immersion teaching methods for the course of power electronics for energy storage system in China. IEEE Access 6. 50683–50692. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2018.2869325 . Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, Ping. 2021. A case study of translanguaging phenomenon in CBI classes in a Chinese university context. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 31(1). 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12324 . Search in Google Scholar

*Wang, Weihong & Xiao Lan Curdt-Christiansen. 2019. Translanguaging in a Chinese–English bilingual education programme: A university-classroom ethnography. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22(3). 322–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1526254 . Search in Google Scholar

Wei, Rining. 2013. Chinese-English bilingual education in China: Model, momentum, and driving forces. Asian EFL Journal 15(4). 184–200. Search in Google Scholar

*Xiong, Tao & Anwei Feng. 2018. Localizing immersion education: A case study of an international bilingual education program in south China. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 23. 1125–1138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2018.1435626 . Search in Google Scholar

*Yang, Yuqian. 2018. An investigation on the students’ opinions of bilingual teaching in universities of western China. Journal of Education and Training Studies 6(12). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i12.3594 . Search in Google Scholar

*Yao, Chunlin. 2022. Is a one-way English immersion teaching approach equitable to those Chinese non-English major students from rural areas? Education and Urban Society 54(4). 470–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131245211027514 . Search in Google Scholar

*Yu, Hongyu, Nisha Yao, Jijia Zhang & Bing Gao. 2019. Time-course of attentional bias for culture-related cues in Mongolian-Chinese bilingual children. International Journal of Bilingualism 23(6). 1483–1501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006918808047 . Search in Google Scholar

*Zhou, Xiaozhou Emily & Steve Mann. 2021. Translanguaging in a Chinese university CLIL classroom: Teacher strategies and student attitudes. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 11(2). 265–289. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2021.11.2.5 . Search in Google Scholar

*Zuo, Miaomiao & Steve Walsh. 2021. Translation in EFL teacher talk in Chinese universities: A translanguaging perspective. Classroom Discourse . 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463014.2021.1960873 . Search in Google Scholar

• Supplementary Material

This article contains supplementary material ( https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2022-0194 ).

© 2023 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

Bilingualism as a Life Experience

• Posted October 1, 2015
• By Bari Walsh

What do we know about bilingualism? Much of what we once thought we knew — that speaking two languages is confusing for children, that it poses cognitive challenges best avoided — is now known to be inaccurate. Today, bilingualism is often seen as a brain-sharpening benefit, a condition that can protect and preserve cognitive function well into old age. 

Indeed, the very notion of bilingualism is changing; language mastery is no longer seen as an either/or proposition, even though most schools still measure English proficiency as a binary “pass or fail” marker.

A growing body of evidence suggests that lifelong bilingualism is associated with the delayed diagnosis of dementia. But the impact of language experience on brain activity has not been well understood.

It turns out that there are many ways to be bilingual, according to HGSE Associate Professor Gigi Luk , who studies the lasting cognitive consequences of speaking multiple languages. “Bilingualism is a complex and multifaceted life experience,” she says; it’s an “interactional experience” that happens within — and in response to — a broader social context.

Usable Knowledge spoke with Luk about her research and its applications.

Bilingualism and executive function

As bilingual children toggle between two languages, they use cognitive resources beyond those required for simple language acquisition, Luk writes in a forthcoming edition of the Cambridge Encyclopedia of Child Development . Recent research has shown that bilingual children outperform monolingual children on tasks that tap into executive function — skills having to do with attention control, reasoning, and flexible problem solving.

Their strength in those tasks likely results from coping with and overcoming the demand of managing two languages. In a bilingual environment, children learn to recognize meaningful speech sounds that belong to two different languages but share similar concepts.

In a paper published earlier this year , she and her colleagues looked at how bilingualism affects verbal fluency — efficiency at retrieving words — in various stages of childhood and adulthood. In one measure of verbal acumen called letter fluency — the ability to list words that begin with the letter F, for instance — bilinguals enjoyed an advantage over monolinguals that began at age 10 and grew robust in adulthood.  

Bilingualism and the aging brain

Luk and her researchers are looking at the neuroscience of bilingualism — at how bilingualism may affect the physical structure of the brain in its different regions.    

What they’ve found so far shows that older adults who are lifelong bilinguals have more white matter in their frontal lobes (important to executive function) than monolinguals, and that their temporal lobes (important to language function) are better preserved. The results support other evidence that persistent bilingual experience shapes brain functions and structures.

A growing body of evidence suggests that lifelong bilingualism is associated with the delayed diagnosis of dementia. But the impact of language experience on brain activity is not well understood, Luk says.

In a 2015 paper, she and her colleagues began to look at functional brain networks in monolingual and bilingual older adults. Their findings support the idea that a language experience begun in childhood and continued throughout adulthood influences brain networks in ways that may provide benefits far later in life.

Who is bilingual?

Monolingualism and bilingualism are not static categories, Luk says, so the question of what it means to be bilingual, and who is bilingual, is nuanced. There are several pathways to bilingualism. A child can become bilingual when parents and caregivers speak both languages frequently, either switching between the two. A child can be bilingual when the language spoken at home differs from a community’s dominant language, which the child is exposed to in schools. Or a child can become bilingual when he or she speaks the community’s dominant language at home but attends an immersion program at school.  

Bilingualism is an experience that accumulates and changes over time, in response to a child’s learning environments, says Luk.

Language diversity in schools

In one of her projects, Luk works with a group of ELL directors to help them understand the diverse needs of their language learners and to find better ways to engage their parents. She’s looking at effective ways to measure bilingualism in schools; at connections between the science of bilingualism and language and literacy outcomes; and at the long-term relationship between academic outcomes and the quality and quantity of bilingual experience in young children.

Part of her goal is to help schools move beyond binary categorizations like “ELL” and “English proficient” and to recognize that language diversity brings challenges but also long-term benefits.

“If we only look at ELL or English proficient, that’s not a representation of the whole spectrum of bilingualism,” she says. “To embrace bilingualism, rather than simply recognizing this phenomenon, we need to consider both the challenges and strengths of children with diverse language backgrounds. We cannot do this by only looking at English proficiency. Other information, such as home language background, will enrich our understanding of bilingual development and learning.”  

Additional Resources

• A Boston community organization that runs a bilingual preschool spoke with Luk about her work and its applications to practice. Read the interview.

Usable Knowledge

Connecting education research to practice — with timely insights for educators, families, and communities

Related Articles

Fun and (Brain) Games

Introducing the B.E.E. Lab

Current Research in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education

• © 2018
• Piotr Romanowski 0 ,
• Małgorzata Jedynak 1

Faculty of Applied Linguistics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

You can also search for this editor in PubMed   Google Scholar

Institute of English, University of Wrocław, Wrocław, Poland

• Brings studies by specialists in the field, covering theory, policy and practice
• Includes studies from various countries and continents
• Offers insights on all aspects of bilingualism from language acquisition, to teaching and learning

Part of the book series: Multilingual Education (MULT, volume 26)

16k Accesses

30 Citations

6 Altmetric

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this book

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Other ways to access

Licence this eBook for your library

Institutional subscriptions

Table of contents (12 chapters)

Front matter, language acquisition and linguistic aspects of bilingualism, strategies of communication in an nnb family: on the way to bilingual maintenance in a monolingual context.

Piotr Romanowski

Is There a Relationship Between Language Competences and Metalinguistic Awareness?

• Zofia Chłopek

Two Grammars in the Input: Two Different Strategies to Process the Input. The Usage-Based Perspective on the Development of Nominal Inflections in a Bilingual Child

• Dorota Gaskins

A Sociolinguistic Perspective of Codeswitching in French as a Foreign Language Class in Malta and its Implications for Learning

• Anne-Marie Bezzina, Joanne Gauci

Understanding Linguistic Features of Estonian-Latvian Bilingual Speech

• Anna Verschik, Elīna Bone

Language Teaching Aspects of Bilingualism

Learning fractions through two languages in an elementary classroom: the interrelation of maltese and english with the mathematics register(s).

• Marie Therese Farrugia

Are Classroom Requests Similar in All EFL Settings? Focusing on a Young Multilingual Learning Environment

• Pilar Safont

Teaching English in a Multilingual Classroom: Addressing Challenges Through Teacher Education and Development

• Daniel Xerri

Bilingualism with English As a “Second Language” and/or Broad Plurilingual Repertoires: A Swiss Point of View

• Georges Lüdi

Language Education Aspects of Bilingualism

Stop the deficit: preparing pre-service teachers to work with bilingual students in the united states.

• Johanna Ennser-Kananen, Christine Montecillo Leider

Discursive Techniques in Heritage Language Education

• Corinne A. Seals

The Evolution of Bilingual Education in Monolingual Contexts: An Andalusian Case Study

• María Luisa Pérez Cañado
• Language acquisition and linguistic aspects of bilingualism
• Metalinguistic awareness
• Nominal inflection in a bilingual child
• Multilingual learning environment
• Broad plurilingual repertoires
• Heritage language education

About this book

This book covers research topics in bilingual education, language policies, language contact, identity of bilingual speakers, early bilingualism, heritage languages, and more, and provides an overview of current theory, research and practice in the field of bilingualism. Each chapter is written by a specialist in the field. Part I focuses on the numerous and heterogeneous relations between languages as well as the implications arising from bilingual speech processing. In Part II, a series of contextualized studies on bilingual classrooms are presented, with diverse research designs applied in different educational settings being a key feature of these studies. Part III bridges theory and practice by offering an insight into mono- and multilingual school settings showcasing examples of educational institutions where bilingualism successfully soared and depicts the needs related to language education. 

Editors and Affiliations

Małgorzata Jedynak

Bibliographic Information

Book Title : Current Research in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education

Editors : Piotr Romanowski, Małgorzata Jedynak

Series Title : Multilingual Education

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92396-3

Publisher : Springer Cham

eBook Packages : Education , Education (R0)

Copyright Information : Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Hardcover ISBN : 978-3-319-92395-6 Published: 03 August 2018

Softcover ISBN : 978-3-030-06425-9 Published: 09 February 2019

eBook ISBN : 978-3-319-92396-3 Published: 24 July 2018

Series ISSN : 2213-3208

Series E-ISSN : 2213-3216

Edition Number : 1

Number of Pages : XIX, 241

Number of Illustrations : 31 b/w illustrations

Topics : Educational Policy and Politics , Multilingualism , Language Education , Language Policy and Planning

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Connect with us:
• X (Twitter)

Building the bilingual education community

• Author By Kate Arthur
• May 13, 2024

Bilingual education candidates and faculty came together at the beginning of the spring semester to share space during the first annual Bilingual Education Social. The idea came from students who voiced the need to build community within the College of Education. 

Cithlali Vazquez, a bilingual cohort candidate, was grateful for the support from faculty and administration.  

“The ISU community should know that for many of us, it is rare to have a space for us to share our experiences and why we believe bilingual education is important to us and the future generation of students,” she said.  

“The ISU community should know that for many of us, it is rare to have a space for us to share our experiences and why we believe bilingual education is important to us and the future generation of students.” Cithlali Vazquez

Bilingual faculty made it a goal to provide more opportunities to build relationships among multilingual/multicultural students who have historically been underserved. The social was planned and joined by bilingual faculty and administration, including Dr. Tara Augspurger, Dr. Evelyn Baca, Dr. Woongsik Choi, Dr. Lara Handsfield, Dr. Allison Meyer, Dr. Erin Mikulec, Dr. Vivian Presiado, and Dr. Elizabeth Skinner.

Presiado welcomed students with Mikulec by telling them, “You are not alone.” 

Student teacher Carlos Rodriguez said he appreciated the opportunity to engage with peers and faculty. “The bilingual program is an amazing program with excellent support and people,” he said. “The candidates benefit from their own cohort, establishing a strong community and support system among the other candidates and professors.” 

Those who are just beginning their teacher preparation journey, such as Ivan Monay, said, “The most impactful aspect of the bilingual social was being able to talk to educators that look like me. We are small but mighty educators!” 

Junior bilingual education major Maggie Simpson said she was encouraged by all the support shown by the faculty and administration. 

Bilingual Education certification allows teachers to work in dual-language classrooms where content is delivered in English and another language. Fluency in English and another language is required for the endorsement and is built into the minor admission criteria. 

“If you are bilingual pursuing a degree in education, maybe the bilingual/bicultural education program is a place you can call home,” Presiado said. 

Several events were planned during the month of April in celebration of Bilingual Advocacy Week. One of the highlights was a keynote lecture with Dr. Jonathan Rosa , a Stanford University associate professor in the Graduate School of Education and the Center for Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity. He spoke on the intersection between language and race and its impact on identity and schooling for Latinx students.   

The bilingual education family also worked with the Student Association for Bilingual Education, the Department of Latin American and Latino Studies, and the Department of Languages, Literatures, and Cultures, in planning events.  

In the spring, ISU bilingual education students partnered with the Urbana High School Dual Language Program to introduce first-generation Latine high school students to ISU’s program as potential future educators. Read more here .  

Dr. Vivian Presiado

Assistant Professor, Bilingual/Bicultural Education

Related Articles

• Privacy Statement
• Appropriate Use Policy
• Accessibility Resources

Iowa Reading Research Center

Embracing Translanguaging in the Classroom with Bilingual Texts

Imagine yourself as a child or adolescent entering a classroom where no one speaks your home language. The teacher expects everyone to speak English during the school day and believes that a few weeks of immersion should be enough for you to figure out how to communicate in English. Your classmates are either making fun of you or ignoring you because you don’t speak English fluently. All you want is to be acknowledged as a peer, for your classmates and teachers to understand that language learning is a difficult process, and for them to be respectful of your home language.

This scenario too often describes the experience of  emergent bilinguals  (or  multilinguals )— English-learning students of all ages who are experiencing English immersion in the classroom. Bi/multilingual English learners often are discouraged from using their home language in the classroom because it is assumed that using languages besides English will cause confusion or slow English learning (Souto-Manning, 2016). However, there is significant research suggesting that the opposite is true: multilingual students actually benefit from using their home language(s) when learning a new language and when learning content in the new language (García & Kleifgen, 2019; Souto-Manning, 2016; Oh & Mancilla-Martinez, 2021; Moses et al., 2021). For example, when English learners are explicitly taught English vocabulary in a way that compares unfamiliar English words to analogous words in their home language, it can help them understand and remember the newly acquired word. Another example occurs during content learning. When teachers provide a text in the students’ home languages alongside the text in English, it allows students to engage more fully with the text. These types of instructional supports are a few ways educators can meet emergent bi/multilinguals halfway. I will revisit these supports in more depth below.

When individuals use two or more languages interchangeably to communicate, this is referred to as  translanguaging . Picture someone starting a sentence in French, then switching to English, and then switching back to French to finish the sentence. When a person is translanguaging fluently, the transitions between languages can be seamless. Sometimes, they may not even realize they are translanguaging because it becomes second nature to them. As Ofelia García, professor emerita at The Graduate Center, CUNY, stated elegantly, “Translanguaging moves beyond the language of the text itself to focus on the language of the person; that is, on the actions of bilinguals as they engage with the text” (2020).

In the classroom, translanguaging could be used by a teacher when giving instructions for an activity by speaking in English while also providing key terms and phrases in the home languages of the emergent English learners in the class. Educators do not have to be fluent in a foreign language to practice translanguaging; just knowing a few words is great! It is important for teachers to allow translanguaging in the classroom because it not only enhances English learning, but it also allows students’ home language skills to flourish (Moses et al., 2021).

Exposure to multiple languages in the classroom can also benefit native English speakers. It can broaden students’ awareness that there are different languages spoken around the world and in their own towns. That awareness may provide motivation for native English speakers to pursue learning another language later in their schooling, which can open many doors for them in the future in terms of career paths, studying abroad, etc.

Forms of Bilingual Texts

Translanguaging is commonly associated with oral language, but it is also applicable to reading. When bi/multilingual students have access to texts that include their home languages, they will be able to engage with the content at the same level as their native English-speaking peers.

There are several ways to incorporate bilingual reading into the classroom, including the use of full-text translations, single-language translations, embedded text, concept bilingual books, and wordless books (Semingson et al., 2014).

Full-Text Translations

Full-text translations  are books that include text in both English and a non-English language. The two translations of the story are either displayed side-by-side on the same page, or with one language on the left page and one language on the right. An example of a full-text translation is  Marisol McDonald Doesn’t Match  by Monica Brown ( see a read-aloud of this book with the text displayed on YouTube ). In the classroom, full-text translations are wonderful resources because they include the language students are comfortable with alongside the language being learned (in this case English), which can help support reading comprehension and vocabulary acquisition when accompanied by explicit instruction from a teacher.

Single-Language Translations

Books that were originally written in one language and then translated into a different language are  single-language translations . In one case study (García, 2020), a seventh-grade English learner was having difficulty reading a textbook in English because she was juggling language and content comprehension simultaneously. Her teacher provided her with the same textbook in her home language. Having the single-language translation allowed her to focus on content understanding in her home language and English vocabulary acquisition with the original version. Though promising, this is only a single qualitative example. Translanguaging is relatively new as a classroom pedagogy, and it will be interesting to see if further research produces evidence for the effectiveness of teaching with translanguaging.

One way to incorporate single-translation books into the classroom is through literary analyses in language arts class. When the focus of instruction is foundational reading skills, such as word recognition, students should use the English version of the text. However, when the focus of instruction is on literary elements such as craft and structure (e.g., comparing the perspectives of two different characters), students may reference the translated text to support their comprehension. For example, imagine that a fourth-grade reading group is reading the first chapter of  Charlie and the Chocolate Factory . An emergent bilingual English student might struggle to participate in a discussion of craft and structure while also trying to understand English words that are unfamiliar to them. If this student is allowed to read a copy of the chapter in their native language, they would be better equipped to participate in the activities and discussion relating to craft and structure at the same level as their peers. Then, with teacher support, the student can reread the text in English and focus on learning vocabulary.

When asking English learners to reread text as described above, we want to be cognizant of not burdening them or causing mental fatigue. However, native English-speaking students in English language arts classrooms are often encouraged to read texts multiple times, focusing on different literacy skills with each reading. Thus, rereading does not necessarily require bilingual students to do more work than their peers. Rather, educators can work with bilingual students to support both content learning and vocabulary acquisition. For example, a teacher might instruct native English-speaking students to read a text three times: once for content, once for craft and structure, and once for vocabulary. The teacher could also instruct English-learning students to read the text three times: once for content (in their home language), once for craft and structure (also in their home language), and once for vocabulary (in English). This way, translanguaging does not require extra reading on the part of the English learners. Rather, it is an individualized approach to the assignment.

In a secondary classroom, an extension activity that would provide literary analysis practice for fluent bi/multilingual students would be to compare and contrast the version written in English and the translated version. This is known as a translation analysis. To guide a discussion about the translation analysis the student is conducting, teachers can use questions such as these:

• How is the story affected when told in another language? What parts of the story are the same in both versions? What parts are different?
• When was the text last translated? How does it affect your reading of it?
• Which version of the text did you prefer and why?

It is important to note that not all bilingual students will be proficient readers in their home language. Many bilingual students speak a language other than English fluently, but they may have never received formal instruction in reading or writing in this language. Using translated texts will only be beneficial for students who have been taught reading and writing in their home language.

Embedded Text

Embedded texts  are written primarily in one language and include some words or phrases from another language. In a general education classroom in the United States, the primary language would be English, and the secondary language would ideally align with the home language of bilingual students in the classroom. An embedded text that would be a great addition to a classroom library is the book  Inside Out and Back Again  by Thanhha Lai. The author translanguages by writing free verse poetry in English and Vietnamese as she depicts the life of an emergent bilingual child. As a prime example of the emergent bi/multilingual experience, this book provides a mirror for students who have had similar experiences by allowing them to see a character like them in a book they can relate to (read more about the importance of this in our  previous blog post ). Embedded texts like this demonstrate that translanguaging is a skill that should be embraced. Speaking more than one language is not a deficit; rather, it is an asset. Including this book and other similar books in a reading unit can introduce all students to translanguaging and how it fits in the classroom.

Concept Bilingual Books

Concept bilingual books  are focused on a theme (e.g., animals) and are written in two languages. For our purposes, one of them should be English. For instance, a concept bilingual book about animals might include pictures of animals with their names in both English and the home language of a student in the class.

For an elementary classroom, a concept bilingual book could be used to supplement a vocabulary lesson about animals. The teacher would put up a picture of an animal with the name of the animal printed next to it in English, and students would say the name aloud. Any students who have concept bilingual books could say the name of the animal in their home language. The teacher would write on the board the names of the animals in all the languages spoken in the classroom to make sure that all students know that the word represents the animal. Before going on to the next animal, the teacher would pronounce each phoneme of the word, say the full word in English, and have the class do the same. This activity showcases for the students that every language has a different name for the same animal. The goal is not for the non-English learners to learn the other languages. Rather, this approach is a good way for a teacher wanting to convey concepts to their students including:

• the existence of languages other than English
• some of their classmates speak multiple languages and are still learning English
• it is okay to be bilingual
• books can be written in languages other than English
• ways for emergent bilinguals to make connections in their minds between the two languages

Translanguaging in the Classroom and Beyond

Including bilingual books in classroom libraries can help emergent bi/multilingual students feel more involved in class, as these language supports may better support their educational needs. As Assistant Professor of Literacy Lindsey Moses and colleagues (2021) explain, “an easy way for teachers to begin building an identity-affirming community could start with something like celebrating bilingualism and encouraging students to use their knowledge in both languages.” Doing so by way of a multilingual classroom library normalizes bilingualism and translanguaging and expresses to everyone in the class that all languages are welcome. A multilingual classroom library also raises awareness that there are authors writing books in non-English languages and using translanguaging in their writing. Showcasing that there are bi/multilingual authors will allow emergent bi/multilingual students to see themselves reflected in the materials they are reading and see that an accomplished author was able to succeed as a bi/multilingual individual.  

Maintaining one’s home language is not the same as sustaining it. In other words, it is not enough that students keep using their home language. Rather, students should be encouraged to continue to develop their proficiency in both languages. Thus, we need to help our students develop their language skills through explicit and collaborative teaching. By incorporating translanguaging into the classroom, students can utilize their home language background as an asset for their English learning. Using more than one language is not harmful, and using translanguaging in the classroom allows bi/multilingual students to participate in class in an effective and equitable way. 

García, O. (2020). Translanguaging and Latinx Bilingual Readers.  The Reading Teacher, 73,  557–562.  https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1883

García, O., Kleifgen, J. A. (2019). Translanguaging and literacies.  Reading Research Quarterly, 55,  553–571.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.286

Moses, L., Hajdun, M., Alvarado-Aguirre, A. (2021). Translanguaging Together: Building Bilingual Identities con Nuevos Amigos.  The Reading Teacher, 75,  291–304.  https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.2060

Oh, M. H., & Mancilla-Martinez, J. (2021). Elementary schoolteachers’ bilingual development beliefs and English learners’ English reading comprehension achievement.  The Elementary School Journal, 122,  165–190.  https://doi.org/10.1086/716899

Semingson, P., Pole, K., Tommerdahl, J. (2014). Using bilingual books to enhance literacy around the world.  European Scientific Journal, 11.   https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/5216     

Souto-Manning, M. (2016). Honoring and Building on the Rich Literacy Practices of Young Bilingual and Multilingual Learners.  The Reading Teacher, 70,  263–271.  https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1518

Waddington, J., Coto Bernal, S., & Siqués Jofré, C. (2018). Creating and evaluating a foreign language area in an early childhood setting.  European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26,  334–346.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2018.1462998

Education | New Vista High School students have bilingual…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Boulder Area
• University of Colorado
• Business Spotlight
• Science & Environment

Education | New Vista High School students have bilingual education ideas

The students plan to share their recommendations with the Boulder Valley school board at its Tuesday meeting. They also presented at this year’s Colorado Association of Bilingual Education and the American Education Research Association’s annual meeting held in Philadelphia.

“Our recommendations could benefit a lot of people,” New Vista sophomore Reese Fusman said. “It’s cool to do something in school that gives you a feeling of accomplishment. It has led to so many amazing things.”

The students, 27 in total, took the class as part of New Vista’s community experience program. Some stayed with the class all year, while others took the class for a quarter or a semester.

“Community experiences are for passion projects,” New Vista Principal John McCluskey said. “You can really dive in on something that gives you a sense of purpose, to ask how can I solve a problem, how can I be of service. It’s a chance for people to get out in the real world. We can get kids to engage with the community.”

The weekly class was taught by Laura Meinzen, a doctoral student in CU Boulder’s School of Education, and overseen by Michelle Renée Valladares, National Education Policy Center associate director .

Valladares said students learned research skills; learned about bilingual education and its implementation in Boulder Valley; collected data at elementary, middle and high schools and at universities inside and outside of the school district, attended class on the CU Boulder campus; and developed their own biliteracy skills by using both Spanish and English throughout their work.

“We wanted to get a lot of different perspectives,” New Vista junior Patrick Martin said.

The teaching assistant for the class, CU Boulder undergraduate student Maya Milan, is a Centaurus High School graduate. She said she is passionate about the research topic and was impressed by how hard the New Vista students worked.

“The heavy lifting was done by them,” Milan said.

The class started by looking at research that shows multilingual students could benefit from continuing to develop their biliteracy skills through high school. But, in Colorado and nationally, most bilingual education programs end after elementary school. While there are some districts that offer middle school options, very few programs continue through high school.

Kristin Nelson-Steinhoff, Boulder Valley’s Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Education director, said Boulder Valley is working to create a K-12 bilingual pathway and appreciates the opportunity to work with the New Vista students.

“The fact that they are engaged in thinking about what that (high school pathway) might look like is super exciting,” she said.

The district started with expanding its middle school options , adding classes for sixth graders at three middle schools last fall. More bilingual classes, for seventh and eighth graders, will be added over the next two years. Boulder Valley also introduced a “bilingual and proud” campaign this school year.

“We’re really taking a systems approach,” Nelson-Steinhoff said, adding that the goal is to create high-quality, sustainable programs.

New Vista students developed a range of recommendations that include translating announcements and fliers for clubs into Spanish, providing class tests in a student’s native language, hiring more bilingual staff members, adding bilingual high school classes and providing summer school classes in Spanish.

“It would help create schools where all students have equal opportunities to learn,”  said New Vista sophomore Hamilton Dunn, adding that he especially wants to see high schools build a sense of belonging for their Spanish-speaking students.

Junior Lily Thoresen said there’s a large Spanish-speaking population in Boulder, including students at New Vista who are native Spanish speakers. The high school students they interviewed who don’t have bilingual options also reported feeling behind as they tried to learn a second language, she said.

“We want there to be more of an opportunity for people who don’t speak English,” she said. “It will help the community and the schools.”

More in Education

Education | Boulder County elementary students perform ‘Macbeth’ at CU Boulder’s Will Power Festival

Education | Photos: Front Range Community College Combined Graduation

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Education | st. vrain valley students to perform at shakespeare in the park.

Education | Skyline High to host annual spring music festival

Greenwood Village, nestled in the heart of Colorado, offers a unique blend of suburban tranquility and modern amenities, making it...

When it comes to finding the freshest, most high-quality meats in Longmont, savvy locals choose Your Butcher Frank. Nestled at...

Discover Excellence in Boulder Real Estate with RE/MAX Patrick Dolan Choosing the Best Real Estate Agent Boulder is crucial whether...

High Plains Bank: A Trusted Partner for Local Farmers Farming is a challenging yet vital part of the Wiggins community,...

Longmont, Colorado, is a city with a vibrant spirit and a community that loves good spirits just as much! At...