Disrupting Gentrification in Dual Language Bilingual Ed
In my last blog post, we explored the landscape of bilingual education over the past 30ish years. How did we go from a nation that attempted to eradicate bilingual education programs to a nation scrambling to secure seats in DLBE programs? If you missed it, you can read all about how the emergence of studies that established the powerful cognitive and social benefits of bilingualism inspired a radical shift in attitude and policy, here.
Before we continue, I’d like to clarify a few terms. Dual Language Immersion (DLI) and Dual Language Bilingual Education (DLBE) refer to program models where English and another heritage language are offered as instructional mediums. Ideally, the classroom will be a 50-50 allocation of instructional time between officially English-dominant learners and speakers of the heritage LOTE (Language Other than English). If a DLI/DLBE program is aligned in its mission to foster bilingualism and biliteracy skills in its learners, then linguistic equality is all but guaranteed. Again, if you’re reading my blog, then you agree that access to one’s heritage language is a human right.
The Dual Language Landscape Keeps Getting Brighter
Moving on, I want to acknowledge some clear victories for equity in bilingual education over the past decade. In 2016, California overturned Prop 227, which had essentially quashed bilingual education entirely in the state of California. (You can thank advocacy groups like Californians Together for their years of organizing!) The following year, we saw Massachusetts loosen restrictions that had been preventing bilingual education programs from expanding in the state. From Utah to Delaware, we witnessed numerous states launch grant programs to fund bilingual education programs. Even Texas, one of the reddest states in our union, revised funding structures to transform its long-standing bilingual education programs into full DLBE models.
Why are states investing in DLBE? The formula is simple enough - and after decades of longitudinal research into academic gains for dual language, states and large school districts are finally coming around. In addition to the lifelong benefits of bilingualism, studies consistently show that English learners in dual-language immersion programs outperform their peers academically and linguistically in the long term. (You can take a deeper dive into the data in this study, published by Stanford School of Education, about dual language education in the San Francisco Unified School District).
So how can something so good be at risk of going so wrong?
A Hat Tip to the Policy Wonks
This past May, Conor P. Williams and The Century Foundation published an extensive, and dare I say disruptive, report examining the potential inequities marring the current landscape. Williams offers data, calls to action, and clear solutions.
Williams’ research team spent more than a decade (2009-2020) gathering data from over 1.1 million students and more than 1,600 schools across 13 states and the District of Columbia. While they acknowledge a degree of imprecision in the data - so many dual language programs are single classes within larger school settings (and in general, this type of data is very hard to track) - their findings were . . . unsettling.
“The data here is unambiguous: despite the surge of support for dual-language immersion programs in general, the US has not and is not making any viable, sustained investment in the linguistic development of our emergent bilingual learners.”
Despite the number of English learners in US public school classrooms steadily climbing, fewer than 8% of English learners are actually enrolled in dual-language programs, and just over 8% of English learners are enrolled in bilingual education programs. That means that roughly 83% of English Learners are left to their own devices in some form of English-only (often sink-or-swim) instruction. Whatever their limitations, the data here is unambiguous: despite the surge of support for dual-language immersion programs in general, the US has not and is not making any viable, sustained investment in the linguistic development of our emergent bilingual learners. This finding reeks of the Monolingual Bias from top to bottom. (If you’re new to this concept, watch this video.)
The Colonization of DLBE Programs
In his 2017 piece for The Atlantic, “The Intrusion of White Families Into Bilingual Schools,” Williams discusses how gentrification and “real-estate privilege” threaten the equity of our dual-language programs. As affluent families flood US cities, seeking dynamic urban economies and cultural diversity, they often purchase real estate in traditionally low-income neighborhoods. Along with homes, families purchase a “right” to send their students to schools in their zip code.
This might seem to bolster integration, but ultimately, lower-income and minority students get priced out of the district – and bilingual classrooms. Oyster-Adams Bilingual School, one of DC's oldest dual-language schools, is struggling to fill its classroom with Spanish-speaking students. In 2017, only 15% of the students were English language learners. Well-resourced families opportunity hoard, and they view bilingual education as an enrichment opportunity. Founder of Integrated Schools Courtney Everts Mykytyn sees a disturbing rise in “one-way” dual-language immersion programs, which serve almost exclusively English-dominant children. “We’re not talking about integration,” Mykytyn says, “we’re talking about what other special programs your white kid can get, your privileged kid can get.”
Just run more DLBE programs!
Just run more DLBE programs!
Is that what you’re thinking too? It’s not that simple. Whatever resistance you might see toward funding bilingual programs, you will find tenfold more resistance toward funding bilingual training programs for teachers. The result? A bilingual teacher shortage. Without bilingual teachers, there is no bilingual education. Already, in many communities, the supply is far from meeting the demand. The Century Report includes a staggering figure: the DC Bilingual Public Charter School had a waiting list that was 675 students long in the 2022-23 school year.
The clear solution is for stakeholders across the bilingual ed landscape to implement structures that prevent “colonization” tactics into DLBE programs in gentrifying neighborhoods.
What now?
This can feel alarming, but as a disruptor, you probably know by now that when the alarm bell rings, it’s a call to arms. We can stop the colonization of our dual-language programs. We can seize the momentum that this trend has created and use it to build support and resources for our emergent bilinguals into our education systems.
If you are a policymaker, a school leader, an English-dominant family or a LOTE-Speaking family, there are clear steps you can take to de-colonize our Dual Language Programs. .
I would be remiss if I didn’t share Williams’ Four Interrelated Principles. So I will leave you with this wisdom to chew on, digest, and manifest.
When resources are available to expand DLBE programming, every effort should be made to grow two-way DLBE programs offering academic instruction in communities where ELs live and in languages that ELs speak.
ELs’ access to new or existing DLBE programs should be overtly prioritized alongside a goal of integrating these programs on linguistic, racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and disability status grounds.
ELs should never be disproportionately enrolled in English-only schools when their communities operate DLBE programs offering academic instruction in their home languages.
To the greatest possible extent, DLBE programs should be designed and implemented to enroll diverse classrooms that resemble the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic demographics of the broader community.
