University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Implementation of dual language immersion to improve academic achievement of Latinx English learners

(USC Thesis Other)

Implementation of dual language immersion to improve academic achievement of Latinx English learners

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Implementation of Dual Language Immersion to Improve Academic Achievement of
Latinx English Learners
by
David Fossett

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

December 2021

© Copyright by David Fossett 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for David Fossett certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Alison Muraszewski
Kathy Stowe
Courtney Malloy, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv

Abstract
Dual language immersion is a promising strategy identified in the literature review to be
beneficial for the improvement of academic achievement of Latinx English Learners, especially
in mathematics. This study utilizes the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model to examine the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors related to the implementation of dual
language immersion at the elementary school level. The Lakewood Language Academy (LLA, a
pseudonym) and Brinton Academy (BA, a pseudonym) were selected as two elementary school
sites for the study due to their existing dual language immersion programs and above average
mathematics performance as indicated by their state assessment. This study utilized qualitative
research methodology through the collection of interview data. Analysis of interview data
resulted in findings that were not generally unique to dual language immersion; however,
recommendations were presented and adapted to dual language immersion implementation with
the intent to support future dual language immersion implementation in Southern Nevada.

v

Acknowledgements
I would like to begin thanking my parents for being my first supporters. My father’s
college experience when I was child and his subsequent career in education have always inspired
me in my own educational journey. I am so grateful of my parents’ high expectations of me
including my mother’s desire for me to become a doctor. Mom, now you can call me doctor!
Thank you, Dr. Alison Muraszewski, for being my first professor of doctoral coursework
and providing me support and feedback as a professor and member of my committee. Thank you,
Dr. Stowe, for also serving on my committee and helping me refine my work. Dr. Courtney
Malloy, I cannot thank you enough for your invaluable support and guidance both as a professor
of my inquiry classes and throughout the entire process of this dissertation study.
I want to thank Abbie and Corban for always wanting to play and motivating me to work
harder to be with them in their present and to be a better and more capable individual for their
future. And finally, I want to thank my wife to whom I dedicate this dissertation. I cherish her
immutable support and belief in me. Stephanie, I love you.

vi

Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Context and Background of the Problem ............................................................................ 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .................................................................. 4
Importance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 5
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................... 7
Definitions........................................................................................................................... 7
Organization of the Dissertation ......................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Literature Review .................................................................................................... 9
Latinx English Learner Academic Achievement ................................................................ 9
Dual Language Immersion ................................................................................................ 20
DLI Critical Success Factors ............................................................................................ 24
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 28
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 30
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 31
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 31
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 32
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 32
Data Sources ..................................................................................................................... 34
Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 36
Ethics................................................................................................................................. 37

vii

Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 39
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 39
Findings............................................................................................................................. 42
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 82
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................ 82
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................... 86
Future Research ................................................................................................................ 94
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 94
References ..................................................................................................................................... 96
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 108

viii

List of Tables
Table 1: Mathematics Proficiency Gaps in Nevada 3
Table 2: Success Indicators of Starting Education With Preschool or Kindergarten 15
Table 3: English Proficiency Classifications Compared With Math Scores 19
Table 4: DLI and Math Proficiency Rates 23
Table 5: Pseudonyms and Descriptions of Principals and Teachers 41

ix

List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 30
1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
The academic achievement gap between Latinx English Learners (ELs) and White
students has been noted since the first administration of the National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP) in 1972 (Rathee 2017). Latinx ELs are defined as students of Latin American
origin who have yet to reach English proficiency (Méndez et al., 2019). They comprise nearly
1/3 of all Latinx students nationally or 3.82 million students (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2019). Educational researchers have suggested that in order to improve academic
performance of ELs, bilingualism should be employed as an asset rather than being viewed as a
deficit (Ardasheva et al., 2012; Carnoy & Garcia, 2017; Henry et al., 2014).
Spanish-English Dual Language Immersion (DLI) is a promising strategy for improving
instruction of Latinx ELs for which optimal results require a combination of native English and
native Spanish-speaking students. DLI includes the alternation of the two languages for
instruction of all content areas with students serving as peer models of the language (Pacific
Policy Research Center, 2010). Moreover, in two large studies conducted in California and Utah
focused on mathematics instruction specifically, all students scored at least as well as their non-
DLI peers in mathematics indicating that there is no detriment to the non-Spanish speaking
students (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Watzinger-Tharp, 2018). However, even more
studies emphasize that ELs perform significantly better than their non-DLI EL peers in
academics (Bialystok, 2018; Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Marian et al., 2013; Steele et al.,
2017; Watzinger-Tharp, 2018). The implementation of DLI has the potential to be beneficial to
the Latinx EL population and ultimately strengthen their academic achievement.
2

Context and Background of the Problem
The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) is recognized as a means for
assessing student comprehension of various academic subjects. The administration of NAEP in
2019 included a nationally representative sample of 296,900 students grades four and eight
(Nation’s Report Card, 2020). Through the examination of NAEP results, a gap in achievement
is identifiable in mathematics. For a student to be considered proficient in fourth grade
mathematics, they must score at least 249 points out of the 500 points possible (Nation’s Report
Card, 2020). In 2019, the average fourth grade Latinx student scored 231 whereas the average
fourth grade White student scored a 249 (Nation’s Report Card, 2020). However, English
proficient Latinx students averaged 238 in contrast to the average score of 217 of Latinx ELs.
This data suggests a relationship between language and mathematics achievement.
The difference between Latinx and White students in mathematics is even more
pronounced in the data from the state of Nevada than in the national data trends. The percentage
of Latinx students in grades 3-5 (the only elementary grade levels with a state-mandated
criterion-referenced mathematics test) who achieved proficiency in mathematics was about 20%
less than White students at each grade level (Nevada Report Card, 2020). If the Latinx ELs,
which comprise 39% of all Latinx students grades 3-5 were excluded from the analysis, the
difference between Latinx and White students would be reduced by nearly half to 8.7%, 9.8%,
and 12.7% in grades 3-5 respectively (Nevada Report Card, 2020) (See Table 1). The correlation
between English language proficiency and mathematics achievement is strong.

3

Table 1
Mathematics Proficiency Gaps in Nevada

Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5
White - Latinx 19% 21.2% 22.4%
White - Latinx EP 8.7% 9.8% 12.7%
White - Latinx EL 32.6% 36.8% 43.3%

As noted in Table 1, mathematics achievement is an issue in Nevada especially for Latinx
ELs (Nevada Report Card, 2020). DLI has been shown to be particularly effective with improved
achievement in mathematics (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Marian et al., 2013; Watzinger-
Tharp et al., 2018) and can support academic achievement of all students, especially for Latinx
ELs (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Watzinger-Tharp et al., 2018). DLI refers to the form of
education where teachers deliver instruction in a target language other than English for at least
50% of the instructional day (Steele et al., 2017). This type of instruction begins in kindergarten
or first grade and continues throughout the rest of the student’s elementary years and more rarely
extends through middle and even high school. The goal of DLI is for students to develop
bilingualism, the ability to speak fluently in two languages, and biliteracy, the ability to read and
write in two languages fluently, while maintaining the academic rigor and achievement equal to
traditional English only educational programs. In the year 2000, there were approximately 260
DLI programs nationally which has expanded to an estimated amount of over 2,000 DLI
programs in the US across 35 states due to the promising results achieved (Ramirez, 2016; US
Department of Education, 2015).
4

Through the implementation of DLI programs, Latinx students have demonstrated both
affective and academic benefits, especially ELs (Christian, 2016; Lindholm-Leary & Hernandez,
2011; Marian et al., 2013). Given that there are more than 92,000 Latinx students K-5 in Nevada,
comprising 42% of all students in grades K-5 in Nevada (Nevada Department of Education,
2019), the importance of this study is magnified at the state level. Only three DLI programs exist
statewide and are operated in northern Nevada (Serrano, 2019); however, more than 75% of all
students in Nevada live in Southern Nevada and as of 2019, there are no DLI programs in
Southern Nevada (Nevada Department of Education, 2019). The study may be used as a
reference of important practices to consider when implementing a DLI program and emphasize
the benefit to be obtained with the creation of DLI programs in Southern Nevada.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
Due to the academic benefits associated with DLI (Christian, 2016; Lindholm-Leary &
Hernandez, 2011; Marian et al., 2013) especially for Latinx ELs (Bialystok, 2018; Steele et al.,
2017) and the absence of DLI programs in Southern Nevada, this project focused on learning
more about implementation of DLI programs. The study was set in two elementary schools in
Southern California which have both been identified as high-performing in all subjects including
mathematics and have well-established Spanish-English DLI programs. The purpose of the
project is to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that are necessary for
DLI program implementation. The findings may be used to inform DLI program implementation
in Southern Nevada. The following research questions guided this study:
1. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
knowledge factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual language
immersion program?
5

2. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
motivational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
3. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
organizational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
Importance of the Study
This study’s importance includes both macro and micro levels. At the micro level, a
significant number of studies found that academic achievement is higher for Latinx EL students
in DLI programs than for Latinx EL students remaining in traditional elementary programs
(Bialystok, 2018; Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Marian et al., 2013; Steele et al., 2017;
Watzinger-Tharp, 2018). Lindholm-Leary and Block (2010) conducted a longitudinal study of
four elementary schools that all had DLI programs and traditional programs at each site. In the
second grade, Latinx ELs in DLI programs achieved a mean score of 289.9 in English language
arts and 338.8 in mathematics. Latinx ELs in the traditional programs achieved a mean score of
300.9 in English language arts and 336.8 in mathematics on the state assessment. In second
grade, Latinx ELs in DLI were already marginally performing higher in mathematics by the
second grade, but English language arts was significantly lower. However, by fifth grade, Latinx
ELs in DLI scored a mean of 322.6 in English language arts compared to a mean of 311.8 by
Latinx ELs in traditional programs. The growth in math achievement was even more pronounced
where Latinx ELs in DLI scored a mean of 379.4 in fifth grade compared to the decreasing mean
score of 324.4 for Latinx ELs in the traditional programs. Overall academic achievement
6

improves for Latinx ELs in DLI, with a particularly pronounced success in improving
mathematics achievement.
Early math achievement is vital to Latinx EL students so that they may be able to
continue that success into high school and beyond. Additionally, Murayama et al. (2013) found
that mathematics growth is correlated with student motivation. Student motivation is largely
affected by a student’s history of perceived failures and successes (Seifert, 2004), and continued
perceptions of failures can be debilitating to the motivation to persevere in mathematics
learning. In addition, mathematics performance at the elementary level is strongly correlated
with mathematics achievement in high school (Butler & Bynner, 2015). Siegler et al. (2012)
analyzed a 10-year longitudinal study and found elementary students who scored lower in
mathematics in elementary school continued to achieve lower scores in mathematics when in
high school. Multiple studies link low mathematical success in high school with lower rates of
college enrollment, graduation, job prospects, and even career earnings (Joensen & Nielsen,
2009; Koedel & Tyhurst, 2012; National Mathematics Advisory Panel, 2008). Koedel and
Tyhurst (2012) found that even the perception of higher math skills is positively correlated with
higher interest from potential employers. Improving early grades instruction for Latinx EL
students is crucial to improving their mathematics achievement and providing them increased
future opportunities in society.
At the macro level, DLI programs have spread and demonstrated success on mandated
state assessments in Nevada’s neighboring states of California (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010)
and Utah (Watzinger-Tharp, 2018). Following the findings and the recommendations of this
study to develop even one DLI program in Southern Nevada would be groundbreaking due to the
absence of any DLI programs in Southern Nevada. The success of the first DLI program may
7

prepare the way for the implementation and refinement of implementation for future programs in
Southern Nevada.
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
Using a modified knowledge, motivation, and organization (KMO) framework derived
from Clark and Estes (2008), this study analyzed the perceptions of principals and teachers of
high-performing elementary schools in Southern California with Spanish-English DLI programs
around the three main factors of the KMO framework. Through qualitative semi-structured
interviews, the researcher explored the perceptions of these elementary school principals and
teachers regarding knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors and influences of
implementing and sustaining a DLI program. Following the interviews, the researcher
transcribed and evaluated them to recommend the most important KMO factors and influences of
successful DLI programs.
Definitions
Dual Language Immersion (DLI): academic program which includes the alternation of the two
languages for instruction of all content areas with students serving as peer models of the
language (Pacific Policy Research Center, 2010).
English Learner (EL): student whose primary language is not English, who is learning English as
a second or subsequent language and who has not yet achieved proficiency approaching the level
of their native English-speaking peers (Beal, Adams, & Cohen, 2010). Previously referred to as
English Language Learner (ELL) but has since been re-classified as EL (US Department of
Education, 2017).
8

English Proficient (EP): student whose primary language is not English who has achieved
English proficiency approaching the level of the native English-speaking peers (Beal, Adams, &
Cohen, 2010)
Latinx: term used to describe a person of Latin American origin (“x” is used as a gender-neutral
or nonbinary alternative to Latino or Latina).
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP): Nationally the largest and most
representative assessment of student achievement in multiple subject areas including
mathematics. Sample sizes are greater than 25,000 students in one assessment year (Rindermann
& Thompson, 2013).
Organization of the Dissertation
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One focused on the overview and
introduction to the problem of practice. The purpose of the study and its importance on a national
and state level is proposed. Chapter Two summarizes the literature on mathematics performance
of Latinx EL students, the potential of Dual Language Immersion education for improving
mathematics instruction, and critical success factors for DLI. Chapter Three details the research
methods that were utilized in this qualitative study. It explains the research design, population
and purposeful sampling, and instrumentation used during the study. It also addresses the topics
of trustworthiness, ethics, and credibility regarding the data collection and analysis. Chapter Four
comprises the findings of the analysis of interview transcripts. Lastly, in Chapter Five, a
discussion of the study is provided including a summary of the findings, recommendations,
future research, and conclusions based on the results.

9

Chapter Two: Literature Review
This study was focused on identifying the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
factors associated with successful DLI program implementation. This chapter addresses relevant
literature including Latinx EL achievement as identified on national and state level standardized
assessments and social policy implementation. The researcher then reviewed many instructional
factors that contribute to the difference in achievement including chronic absenteeism, access to
quality education, preschool education, English Only instruction, and English language
proficiency. DLI shows promise in improving mathematics instructional gains for Latinx ELs by
employing the Spanish language as an asset rather than considering it a barrier to learning.
Finally, the researcher reviews the critical success factors for implementing and sustaining DLI
programs.
Latinx English Learner Academic Achievement
In the early 1970s, NAEP began to assess academic performance of students nationwide
and disparate gaps were found in achievement including mathematics between Latinx and White
students (Brown, 1980). Latinx students scored 10% - 13.4% lower than White students in 1972-
73 and 8.2% - 13.8% lower in 1977-78 (Brown, 1980). The NAEP mathematics test was
administered two more times in the 1980s and then more frequently in the 1990s (Campbell,
Voelkl, & Donahue, 1998). The raw scores in the 1980s through the 1990s fluctuated slightly,
but the difference between Latinx and White students persisted (Brown, 1980; Campbell, Voelkl,
& Donahue, 1998). Rathee (2017) found that in the NAEP reporting years of 2011, 2013, and
2015, the difference between White and Latinx student math scores was approximately 18
points. While the scores from the 4
th
grade Latinx students highlighted a one-point closing of the
gap from 2011 to 2015, the difference between Latinx and White students in all other grades
10

tested remained constant or increased by 1-2 points. One of the key attempts to improve
academic achievement for all students has been the implementation of progressive social policy.
Legislators have used social policy as a means of trying to address issues related to
inequitable educational outcomes, but many policies have focused primarily on accountability
mechanisms rather than underlying instructional issues. The implementation of the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2001 was intended to improve academic achievement nationally, but only resulted
in demonstrating the current state of national academic deficiency. Ware (2004) quoted a saying
used among farmers, “you don’t weigh a pig to make him fatter” (p. 855) in order to illustrate
that new accountability systems involving high stakes assessments do not address the learning
needs underlying the disparity of academic achievement.
For example, in 2002 Joel Klein was appointed the Chancellor of New York City
Department of Education, the largest public school system in the United States. Klein’s mission
was to close the achievement gap for the at-risk lower performing students in NYC by
developing and administering an annual standardized test, giving the schools a letter grade,
providing principals and teachers with performance based financial bonuses, establishing charter
schools, and increasing support for Teach For America. While at first there appeared to be
substantial gains achieved, the state department of education found schools began to limit the
curriculum to teach to the tests, decrease in collaboration as competitive bonuses were at stake,
and even worse, some schools excluded students from testing and even tampered with the tests
(Reid & Reid, 2011). In 2010 after years of supposed progress, the New York City tests were
revised to be on par with national standards and upon receiving the results, double digit
percentage drops in proficiency ensued across the school system, which showed that no
11

substantial improvement towards closing the achievement gap had occurred in the previous eight
years of Klein’s accountability initiatives (Reid & Reid, 2011).
Contributing Instructional Factors
The contributing instructional factors for Latinx elementary students that most negatively
impact their achievement are chronic absenteeism, access to quality instruction, preschool
participation, English-only instruction policies, and English language proficiency (Carnoy &
Garcia, 2017).
Chronic Absenteeism
A student that is classified as chronically absent is defined as being absent for more than
10% of the required days in the school year (US Department of Education, 2019). Latinx
students who are chronically absent tend to miss school for family related concerns (Vasquez-
Salgado et. al, 2015) and Latinx students are 17% more likely to be chronically absent than their
White peers (US Department of Education, 2019). Furthermore, in a longitudinal study of a
nationally representative sample of kindergarten students, students that were chronically absent
scored 10-20% below the other students that were not chronically absent in their mathematics
assessment (Gottfried, 2014).
Gottfried and Kirksey (2017) conducted an analysis of grades three through five from the
school years 2011-2013 of an urban school district in California to determine the correlation
between absenteeism and Academic Performance Index (API) score. API, the representative
measure of school and district test score performance in California, had a possible score range of
200 to 1,000, with a score of 800 serving as the proficiency benchmark. Gottfried and Kirksey
(2017) found that every fall absence was correlated with a .17 decrease in reading score and a .31
decrease in the math score on API, and the spring absences correlated with a .35 decrease in
12

reading score and a 1.31 decrease in math score significantly magnifying the impact of each
absence. Garcia and Weiss (2018) found that in the year of the 2015 NAEP administration, 24%
of all Latinx ELs missed three or more days of school with 3.9% missing 10 or more days of
school. Latinx non-ELs missed three or more days and 10 or more days of school at the rates of
19.1% and 1.7% respectively. The mathematics performance of Latinx non-ELs, missing more
than 10 days of school, was more severely impacted than other demographics with an effect of
.74 standard deviations compared to .64 on average.
Access to Quality Instruction
The opportunity gap refers to the arbitrary conditions in which students are born and
raised which result in varying levels of achievement. One of the most pronounced features of the
opportunity gap is the lack of access to quality instruction for Latinx students due to zoning for
high poverty schools (NCES, 2020). Students in high poverty schools experience lower growth
on average than low poverty schools and less frequently achieve adequate yearly progress (AYP)
than low poverty schools (Ross et al., 2012). NCES (2020) defines high poverty schools as
schools where more than 75% of the student population qualifies for free or reduced lunch
(FRL). Mid-high poverty is between 50.1 - 75.0% FRL, mid-low poverty is 25.1 - 50.0% FRL,
and low poverty is less than 25% FRL. An astounding 45% of Latinx students attend high
poverty elementary schools in the US with another 29% attending mid-high poverty elementary
schools totaling 74% of all Latinx students attending mid-high to high level poverty elementary
schools (NCES). Latinx students are the most represented demographic in mid-high to high level
poverty schools. To further illustrate the issue, 27% of all elementary students in the US are
Latinx and 20.0% of all elementary-aged students in the US are attending mid-high to high
poverty elementary schools.
13

Sass et al. (2012) conducted an analysis from the state education databases of Florida and
North Carolina including data about the schools, teachers, and students over the years 2000 to
2005. Sass et al. (2012) specifically examined over 17,000 teachers to measure the effectiveness
of teachers with regards to student achievement and growth while considering the factors of prior
schooling inputs and achievement, student and family background, peer influences, teacher
characteristics, and school characteristics. Using a value-added framework, Sass et al. (2012)
created a proprietary method to determine the specific amount of teacher effect on student
achievement and thereby measure teacher effectiveness. Sass et al. (2012) found that the average
effectiveness of teachers is lower in high poverty schools when compared with low poverty
schools. While the most effective teachers in high poverty schools are just as effective as the
most effective teachers in low poverty schools, the gap in teacher quality comes from the other
end of the spectrum. The least effective teachers in high poverty schools tend to be much less
effective than the least effective teachers in low poverty schools. The access to quality education
is starkly apparent for Latinx students. The access to quality instruction begins as early as
preschool.
Preschool Education
Preschool education is associated with higher levels of educational attainment and
achievement (Nguyen et al., 2016; Reynolds et al., 2011; Watts et al., 2018) and only 34% of
Latinx students are enrolled into preschool programs, compared to the 43% of White students
(NCES, 2020). Reynolds et al. (2011) began studying 1,539 Chicago inner-city students where
989 attended preschool and 550 started their education in kindergarten with 104 from the
preschool group dropping out and 67 from the kindergarten group also withdrawing from the
study over time. Those that attended preschool attained higher levels of education, income, and
14

socioeconomic status (SES) as well as less involvement in the court system and substance abuse.
The comparison rates for high school completion were 81.5% versus 75.1%, on-time high school
graduation was 44.3% versus 36.6%, and attendance to 4-year college was 14.7% vs 11.2%. As
of 2007, average income was $11,582 versus $10,796, substance abuse was 13.7% versus 18.9%,
felony arrest was 19.3% versus 24.6%, incarceration and jail history were 15.2% versus 21.1%,
and food stamp participation was 43.9% versus 52.0% (see Table 2). In addition to the vast
impact that preschool education may have upon students, preschool education also has a
correlation with later elementary mathematics achievement.

15

Table 2
Success Indicators of Starting Education With Preschool or Kindergarten
Comparison Measures Started public education in
preschool
Started public education in
kindergarten
High School Completion 81.5% 75.1%
On-Time HS graduation 44.3% 36.6%
4-Year College Attendance 14.7% 11.2%
2007 Average Income $11,582 $10,796
Substance Abuse 13.7% 18.9%
Felony Arrest 19.3% 24.6%
Incarceration & Jail History 15.2% 21.1%
Food Stamp Participation 43.9% 52.0%

In two studies related to mathematics achievement, researchers tested preschool children
in the fall and spring using the Research-based Early Mathematics Assessment (REMA)
followed by using the Tools for Elementary Assessment in Math 3-5 (TEAM 3-5) in the spring
of fourth and/or fifth grade (Nguyen et al., 2016; Watts et al., 2018). REMA consists of two
parts: Part 1 assesses the competencies of student counting, number recognition, and addition
and subtraction; Part 2 assesses the competencies of student patterning, measurement, and spatial
16

geometry. REMA has on overall item reliability of .94, internal reliability of .90, and an inter-
rater reliability of .98. TEAM 3-5 assessed a wider range of mathematical concepts associated
with appropriate grade level knowledge including multiplication, division, fractions, geometry,
and data interpretation. Nguyen et al. (2016) completed the assessments with 781 students and
found that a one standard deviation increase in counting and cardinality resulted in
approximately a half standard deviation increase in 5th grade mathematics scores. Watts et al.
(2018) completed the assessments with 880 students and found that a weaker, but still potential
benefit that a one standard deviation increase in preschool math learning resulted in
approximately a quarter standard deviation increase in 5th grade mathematics scores. Nguyen et
al. (2016) found advanced counting competencies to be significantly predictive of fifth grade
math achievement with a correlation coefficient value of .62, which was more than the other
competencies of patterning, spatial-geometry, and measurement and data. Preschool participation
can have a positive impact on elementary mathematics achievement for all students including
Latinx students (Nguyen et al., 2016; Watts et al., 2018). Conversely, it can be detrimental for
Latinx students to not attend preschool (Reynolds et al., 2011). Not only the participation in
preschool and elementary programs, but the language of instruction has a significant impact on
Latinx students as well (Lleras-Muney & Shertzer, 2015; Menken & Sánchez, 2019; Tazi, 2014).
English Only Instruction
English only instruction refers to the strict use of only the English language in instruction
of ELs with the objective to have ELs develop English fluency as quickly as possible (Lleras-
Muney & Shertzer, 2015). Multiple studies seem to suggest that English only instruction does in
fact achieve that goal for most Latinx ELs, but at the cost of other desired educational outcomes
including language and cognitive development (Tazi, 2014), mastery of mathematical concepts
17

and content (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010; Marian et al., 2013; Watzinger-Tharp et al., 2018),
and development of translanguaging (Menken & Sánchez, 2019). Translanguaging refers to
teachers and bilingual students incorporating both home language and English intentionally in
the learning process and is associated with increased academic gains for Latinx students
(Menken & Sánchez, 2019).
In a New York school district, Tazi (2014) conducted a study with 158 kindergarten
students district-wide that identified as both Latinx and EL. Of those 158 students, 74 received
instruction only in English and 84 received one of two forms of bilingual instruction namely
transitional or DLI (Tazi, 2014). Transitional bilingual instruction requires nearly all instruction
to begin in Spanish with a gradual transition to using English in the classroom. By the start of the
second semester the majority of instruction should be in English. The teachers of DLI utilized a
50/50 model where the bilingual teacher equally alternated instruction in English and Spanish on
a daily basis (Tazi, 2014).
Tazi (2014) utilized the Early Development Instrument (EDI) which measures school
readiness based on five developmental domains: Social Competence, Physical Health and Well-
being, Language and Cognitive Development, and Communications Skills and General
Knowledge. EDI indicates school readiness for students scoring in the 75th percentile or higher
in any domain. Tazi (2014) found that Latinx EL students who received bilingual instruction
were rated as more interested and prepared for numeracy and literacy. Tazi (2014) further found
that bilingually instructed Latinx EL students were 3.9 times more likely to score in the 75th
percentile in four or more domains than Latinx students receiving English only instruction.
While English only instructional policies may be well-intentioned, English language proficiency
18

increases at the expense of other academic domains (Lleras-Muney & Shertzer, 2015; Tazi,
2014).
English Language Proficiency
English language proficiency has a large impact on mathematics achievement and that
becomes more noticeable among the Latinx demographic that makes up more than 75% of ELs
nationally (Nation’s Report Card, 2020) and 88% of ELs in the state of Nevada (Nevada Report
Card, 2020). Carnoy and Garcia (2017) found that one-third of US Latinx students that are also
classified as ELs achieve the lowest scores in mathematics on average. The gap between White
and Latinx students’ math achievement can thus be more readily understood as the Latinx
students’ performance is analyzed with the distinction between EL and non-EL Latinx students.
Nationally, Latinx non-ELs have been trending between .21 and .17 standard deviations lower
than White students over the past decade according to analysis of NAEP data; however, Latinx
ELs have been fluctuating between .71 and .82 standard deviations below White students in the
same time frame (Carnoy & Garcia, 2017).
Henry et al. (2014) conducted a study of 1,200 elementary students attending an
elementary school in South Florida where 87% of the students identified as Latinx and 42%
identified as both Latinx and EL. Multiple linear regressions were performed in analysis of the
students’ achievement on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, which revealed English
language proficiency as a strong predictor of mathematics achievement. Specifically, Henry et al.
(2014) found 47.9% of the variance in math scores could be attributed to English proficiency
levels. Ardasheva et al. (2012) conducted a similar study in Colorado with a sample size of
18,528 students to compare native English speakers (NES), Latinx ELs, and additionally former
ELs. Former ELs achieved a mean score of 53.85, outperforming the NES by 9.52 and the ELs
19

by 19.50 points. Ardasheva et al. (2012) found that not only was English proficiency a strong
predictor of mathematics achievement, but due to the average score of former ELs being higher
than that of non-ELs, there appeared to be a correlation between bilingualism and improved
mathematics achievement.

Table 3

English Proficiency Classifications Compared With Math Scores

Former ELs NES ELs
Mean Math Score 53.85 44.33 34.35

20

Impact of Language for Assessment Administration
Testing in English with accommodations such as extra time or a bilingual dictionary are
among the most common nationally because of the ease of offering such accommodations
(Kieffer et al., 2009). In a national analysis, Stansfield et al. (2011) found 14 states provided a
native language translated test accommodation for ELs, but the impact delivered varying results
due to EL native language proficiency. Many ELs only have oral proficiency in their native
language, so two states provided native audio-recorded test options for Spanish, the most
represented EL language. The audio-recorded test accommodation resulted in improved math
scores of Latinx ELs, but given resource constraints and inability to offer this accommodation in
other languages, no other departments of education have attempted to provide this
accommodation. The most significant barrier wedging the math achievement gap between White
and Latinx students is the English language. While providing a language accommodation during
test time shows promise, taking the language barrier into account throughout the year by
integrating instruction in Spanish demonstrates even more potential to improve mathematics
results for Latinx ELs.
Dual Language Immersion
DLI is an educational delivery model wherein students learn academic content in both
English and another language starting in kindergarten or first grade through fifth grade, with
some programs extending through middle and even high school. Due to 76.5% of all ELs being
Latinx (NCES, 2019), most DLI programs utilize Spanish and English as the two alternating
languages (Center for Applied Linguistics, 2020) and the Spanish-English DLI programs are
what the researcher reviewed in this section and refer to throughout this study when addressing
DLI. In DLI, there are two teachers that share two classes of students. One teacher teaches
21

academic content only in Spanish and the other teaches academic content only in English. These
teachers transition their two classes of students between each other’s classrooms each day such
that students are in each classroom receiving an equal amount of instruction in Spanish and in
English daily (Center for Applied Linguistics, 2020). The aim of DLI is for students to attain
bilingualism and biliteracy while mastering the same academic content as their non-DLI peers.
Latinx Students in DLI
Latinx students, both EL and EP, that are enrolled in DLI academically outperform
Latinx students enrolled in mainstream programs. Marian et al. (2013) conducted a study of
2,009 students in grades 3-5 of a public school district in Chicago that represented both
traditional English only instruction and DLI. Marian et al. (2013) notes many advantages in the
results of the State Standards Achievement Test. Of all the content advantages observed in this
study, increased math ability was the most noticeable (Marian et al., 2013). As math content is
taught in Spanish, Latinx ELs and Latinx students whose native language is Spanish are much
more likely to have increased comprehension of the lesson by removing the language barrier. In
addition to the removal of the language barrier half of the time, developing Latinx students as
competent bilingual students can provide nonlinguistic, cognitive benefits including increased
working memory capacity, cognitive flexibility, and inhibitory control. These executive
functioning skills can aid a student in their ability to perform simple arithmetic tasks more
quickly, hold a problem in working memory while they shift their attention to another aspect of
the problem, and to be able to ignore extraneous information in problems. Improved executive
functioning could also help students simply focus better on the lesson during instruction (Marian
et al., 2013).
22

Watzinger-Tharp et al. (2018) conducted a study on a sample of 2,287 fourth grade
students in Utah of which 21% identified as Latinx and 7% as Latinx EL. 1,139 students were
mainstream and 1,148 students were enrolled in DLI. Latinx ELs achieved comparable levels of
math achievement with the rest of their DLI peers of which 71% were White. In 2010,
Lindholm-Leary and Block conducted a highly cited study that included four low socioeconomic
status schools with 80% Latinx demographic in two distinct geographic areas of California. The
sample included students in DLI and mainstream elementary programs grades 4-6 and compared
their scores on the California Standards Test (CST). DLI Latinx ELs performed substantially
better than mainstream Latinx ELs involved in the study. DLI Latinx ELs achieved math
proficiency at the following rates compared to mainstream Latinx ELs: 40% vs. 20%, 34% vs.
12%, 44% vs. 20% in grades 4-6 respectively (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010). DLI Latinx ELs
even more notably performed at nearly the same levels as the Latinx state demographic overall
with the following percentage proficiency rates: 40% vs. 43%, 34% vs. 36%, 44% vs. 29%. Note
that while DLI Latinx ELs passed mathematics at just below the rate of Latinx students overall,
by grade 6, DLI Latinx ELs surpassed the average Latinx student performance.
DLI Latinx English Proficient (EP) students passed the mathematics test at higher rates
than the average Latinx students in the state of California with the following proficiency rates:
59% vs. 43%, 46% vs. 36%, 73% vs. 29% (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010). By mid-program,
grades 4-5, Latinx students perform significantly better than their peers in mainstream programs
and by 6th grade, they consistently perform at higher levels than the rest of the Latinx
demographic in the state of California. This strong evidence suggests that DLI programs are
extremely beneficial to Latinx students in the short run and even more so long term. Schools
23

should explore specific components of DLI programs to address the viability and continuity of
said programs.

Table 4

DLI and Math Proficiency Rates

Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6
DLI Latinx ELs 40% 34% 44%
Non-DLI Latinx ELs 20% 12% 20%
DLI Latinx EP 59% 46% 73%
State Overall Latinx 43% 36% 29%

24

DLI Critical Success Factors
For DLI to be successfully organized, schools must consider several factors including
curriculum (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008), professional development (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008;
Menken & Solorza, 2014; Rocque et al., 2016), and the adequate selection and training of the
principal (Menken & Solorza, 2014; Rocque et al., 2016), which will affect many other facets of
implementation and sustainment. Alanis and Rodriguez (2008) found that effective bilingual
teachers, active parent participation, and knowledgeable leadership and continuity were critically
important to the success of a DLI program. The purposeful sample included interviews with the
campus principal and 10 dual language teachers of an urban K-5 school in Texas. Rocque et al.
(2016) noted that successful DLI principals all shared the three traits of being a DLI guru,
proponent, overseer. That study included a census survey of the 78 Utah elementary principals
resulting in 57 responses with the goal to identify unique skills and traits that principals of
successful programs must have.
Effective Bilingual Teachers
Remedial bilingual and ESL programs tend to simplify the curriculum due to the limited
English proficiency of the students, but in DLI, students are to be held to the same standards and
rigor as English-only peers. That rigor should be maintained in both languages of instruction for
maximum efficiency (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). Just being able to speak Spanish is insufficient
without the development of pedagogical skills necessary to engage students and disseminate
content (Aquino-Sterling & Rodríguez-Valls, 2016). These teachers need to collaborate
effectively with their partner English teacher to maximize student outcomes (Henderson &
Palmer, 2015). In this collaboration, the balance between language and academic development is
important to discuss, because while language may be the object of some lessons and means of
25

delivery (Aquino-Sterling & Rodríguez-Valls, 2016), there are many times that the language is
only the delivery method.
Active Parent Participation
In a successful DLI program, principals encourage parents to volunteer in their child’s
classroom (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). Multiple studies have supported the strong relationship
between parental involvement and student performance (Jung & Zhang, 2016; McCormick et al.,
2013; McNeal, 2015) and this continues to be the case for Latinx students both at school and in
the home (LeFevre & Shaw, 2012). Alanis and Rodriguez (2008) found that parents given
opportunities to experience second language acquisition like their students in a continuing
education evening course offered by their children’s teachers created a greater sense of
understanding and empathy in parents. DLI also enabled parental commitment to bilingualism
and bicultural benefits that are available to their students. This commitment and motivation can
have a strong impact on student commitment, motivation, and actualization of the shared vision
created with parents, teachers, and students (McNeal, 2015).
Knowledgeable Leadership and Continuity
The principal’s commitment to implementing and sustaining DLI is essential and rounds
out the fourth critical success factor identified by Alanis and Rodriguez (2008). The principal
must develop a shared vision between the administration, teachers, parents, and students of
desired outcomes for DLI before transitioning into the technical planning (DeMatthews &
Izquierdo, 2018). This technical planning refers to curriculum, budget, staffing, professional
development, grading policies, master schedule, and teaching practices. Apart from the initial
implementation, a principal must remain current on DLI curriculum and policies in order to lead
staff members and advocate for parents as this method of instruction continues to develop
26

(Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). The principal may remain updated by continuing to attend
professional development and trainings specifically designed for DLI. The principal must also
navigate the logistics to ensure program sustainability for the program to reach the potential
success that comes from DLI curricular continuity (Lindholm-Leary & Block, 2010). Rocque et
al. (2016) identified three primary roles principals must fulfill in order for DLI to be effective
which are the following: 1) DLI Guru, 2) DLI proponent, and 3) DLI overseer.
DLI Guru
Rocque et al. (2016) suggested that principals needed to have an extensive knowledge of
curriculum, instruction, assessment, culture, and language pertaining to DLI. In order to obtain
this knowledge, the principal should receive specialized DLI training including how to support,
train, and lead teachers in the instructional model. An important aspect of learning how to
support those teachers is that the principal must be able to predict possible pitfalls and know how
to avoid them (DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2018).
DLI Proponent
The principal must be able to advocate passionately and promote DLI to all stakeholders,
which will in turn create additional DLI proponents. Rocque et al. (2016) further expounded that
principals must be able to create a shared vision for all staff both immersion and non-immersion
teachers, because while immersion teachers generally value the program they work in, the non-
immersion teachers need to feel a sense of belonging within the school vision to improve overall
culture and attitudes towards DLI. The principal must find opportunities to educate the public at
large about the benefits to the DLI model (Rocque et al., 2016).
DLI overseer
27

The principal as a DLI overseer is tasked with being a recruiter of students, high-quality
teachers, tracking progress, and making immersion logistically sustainable (Rocque et al., 2016).
For a principal to become an effective DLI overseer, they must already be a DLI guru and
proponent, which affects whether they have the skills to oversee which is fundamental to
program success and longevity. The principal as DLI overseer must have the ability to counteract
student attrition as students move away or parents determine that their student is not a good fit
for DLI. Principals can allow late admittance to DLI for English or Spanish-speaking students in
the lower grades, but the options become more limited if attrition occurs in the upper grades.
Only native or heritage Spanish-speaking students may join the program in the upper grades
(Rocque et al., 2016).
Menken and Solorza (2014) conducted a study with 14 principals and seven assistant
principals in New York City public elementary schools. They found that principals who adopted
DLI had experience and/or training and certifications regarding bilingual education or TESOL
(Menken & Solorza, 2014). In addition to knowledge, principals of DLI programs verbalized and
demonstrated a strong belief in DLI and a commitment to bilingualism and diversity. The
principals needed to be adept at resourceful allocation and distribution of available funding to
maintain DLI programs. Menken and Solorza (2014) recommended that all administrators
receive formal training and certification to support ELs appropriately. The literature makes
repeated reference to the pivotal role of the principal and how they affect the success of DLI
programs (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008; DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2018; Menken, 2014; Rocque
et al., 2016).
28

Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework conveys the researcher’s understanding of the problem of
practice and how the variables of the study relate to each other (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). To
develop the conceptual framework, the researcher employs their own knowledge and experience,
existing theories, research, and experiments (Maxwell, 2013). The researcher’s experience as an
educator, the knowledge derived from the literature review, and the KMO framework (Clark &
Estes, 2008) influenced the design of the conceptual framework for this study (See Figure 1)
In order to effectively implement DLI, the requisite knowledge, motivation, and
organizational resources must be present (Clark & Estes, 2008). The K circle refers to the
knowledge and skills of principals and teachers with a focus on the following: curriculum,
assessment, and instruction; and impact of English language proficiency on mathematics
achievement. Principals must make the ultimate decision on the type of curriculum used, how
assessments are administered in their school, and the quality of instruction delivered to students
(Rocque et al., 2016). If a principal and teachers understand that the English language is the
primary barrier to the Latinx EL student comprehension of mathematics, the principal and
teachers may be more motivated to include Latinx EL students in DLI to improve their learning
and outcomes.
The M circle refers to the motivation of principals and teachers, which stems from the
shared vision, commitment to bilingualism, translanguaging, and comprehension of the benefits
of bilingualism. Principals and teachers need to be able to use their knowledge of DLI and its
benefits to create the shared vision of the DLI program. Principals and teachers will be
additionally motivated to implement DLI when they understand the benefits for both native
English speakers and Latinx ELs to develop bilingualism. One of those benefits is
29

translanguaging, which can lead to increased connections for students and improved academic
gains (Menken & Sánchez, 2019).
The O circle refers to the organizational resources, features, and structures including the
following: student and teacher recruitment; progress monitoring of both English, Spanish, and
mathematics achievement; effective bilingual teachers; and initial and ongoing professional
development for principal and teachers. Principal must be able to recruit a mix of students
including native English-speaking students and native Spanish speaking students (CAL, 2020),
which process is simplified when students of each language already attend their school. Most
importantly, principals need to either already have bilingual teachers on staff or have the ability
to hire bilingual teachers to implement the Spanish portion of instruction for DLI. Principals will
need to have a means of progress monitoring, a way to collect valid and reliable data to compare
a student’s performance to expected outcomes, available to determine academic success in DLI.
Menken and Solorza (2014) share that principals and teachers need to receive professional
development throughout the year specifically related to DLI when implementing DLI for best
outcomes.

30

Figure 1.
Conceptual Framework

Summary
In spite of progressive social policy, Latinx EL students have consistently lower
academic achievement scores than other demographic subgroups. Many instructional factors
have contributed to this difference including chronic absenteeism, access to quality education
and preschool education participation, and English only instruction. DLI shows potential in
neutralizing language as a barrier and converting it into an asset for academic growth, especially
in the area of mathematics. The critical success factors of DLI include effective bilingual
teachers, active parent participation, and a principal that is knowledgeable of and dedicated to
DLI.
31

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this promising practices study was to learn about how to establish and
maintain a successful dual language immersion program from a state with similar demographics
as Nevada. Using the Clark and Estes KMO model, this study focused on the knowledge,
motivational, and organizational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a
dual language immersion program. In this chapter, the overview of the design, setting, methods
for data collection, and methods for analysis are presented. Next, the description of participants
with interview sampling strategy and instrumentation used to collect data are introduced. Lastly,
the credibility and trustworthiness, and ethics of the study are proposed.
Research Questions
To determine how to establish and sustain a dual language immersion program, the study
asked the following questions:
• What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
knowledge factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual language
immersion program?
• What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
motivational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
• What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
organizational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
32

Overview of Design
This study employed a basic qualitative research design for gathering and analyzing data
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Merriam and Tisdell (2016) find the basic qualitative research design
is common in education research, and allows the researcher to understand how “people make
sense of their lives and their experiences” (p. 24). In this study, interviews allowed for an
inductive approach that generates theory and hypotheses regarding the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors and influences that are essential in the implementation of DLI
programs. To do so, a purposeful sampling approach was utilized in order to select individuals
that would provide the information needed to address the purpose of the research (Johnson &
Christensen, 2015).
Research Setting
The research took place in Southern California at two different school sites. Criteria for
the selection of the school were the following: schools were in at least their fifth year of
implementation, mathematics scores were above average for their local education agency, and
the DLI partner language was Spanish. The 2018-2019 school year was the last year in which
statewide proficiency exams were administered to all students due to the COVID-19 pandemic
that resulted in no testing during the 2019-2020 school year. Therefore, mathematics scores used
for selection criteria were from the 2018-2019 school year. Both schools are referred to by
pseudonyms to maintain confidentiality.
Lakewood Language Academy (LLA) serves grades K-5 with over 50 teachers, one
principal, and one assistant principal serving nearly 1,000 students where 60.4% of the students
are White compared to 28.5% Latinx. At LLA, 24.3% of the students are socioeconomically
disadvantaged with only 1.6% of students classified as ELs. LLA and its DLI program were
33

founded in 2006. In terms of mathematics scores, 70% of the students met or exceeded
proficiency on the state math assessment compared to 39% of students statewide.
Brinton Academy (BA) is a K-8 school employing approximately 50 teachers, one
principal, and one assistant principal to serve nearly 900 students where 76.5% of the students
are Latinx with only 10.8% White. At BA, 70.1% of the students are socioeconomically
disadvantaged with 41.5% of students classified as ELs. BA and its DLI program were founded
in 2015. In terms of mathematics scores, 47% of students met or exceeded the proficiency on the
state math assessment compared to 39% of students statewide.
The Researcher
The researcher studied both mathematics and Spanish in their undergraduate program and
has taught both subjects during their teaching career and is a proponent of both subjects. The
researcher has a desire to see DLI programs implemented in Southern Nevada especially for the
benefit of Latinx students. The researcher has been employed within charter schools for three
school years and has been employed in education for 10 years total. In that time, the researcher
has been a teacher, coach, athletic director, assistant principal, and principal. The researcher does
not work with any of the personnel from the schools and districts represented in the study.
Saunders (2019) explains that paradigms of inquiry inevitably shape how people
understand research and the methods that they use to interpret the findings. This research study
was framed through the paradigm of pragmatism. Creswell and Creswell (2018) describe
pragmatism as a focus on the problem, consequences, and the solution. Due to the focus of
pragmatism on the problem, there is no limit to the ways in which one researches. Pragmatists
use both qualitative and quantitative research methods. The decision of one or the other or both
depended on which data would provide them with the best understanding of the problem, which
34

in this study, the researcher determined that qualitative research would provide the most
thorough data regarding the perceptions of principals and teachers regarding KMO factors for
implementation of a DLI program.
Data Sources
Data were gathered by interviewing 10 participants including four principals and six
teachers. As mentioned in the research design overview, the researcher used interviews as a
means of gathering data regarding the KMO factors related to the implementation of DLI. This
section on data sources includes information about the participants, instrumentation, and data
collection procedures.
Participants
The researcher utilized purposeful sampling of 10 individuals to collect the qualitative
interview data. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) note “purposeful sampling is based on the
assumption that the investigator wants to discover, understand, and gain insight and therefore
must select a sample from which the most can be learned” (p. 96). Patton (2015) further adds that
purposeful sampling provides information-rich cases that cannot be obtained simply through
probabilistic sampling. Criteria for the purposive sample was the following: being the founding
principal of the DLI program, being the current principal overseeing the DLI program, or
working as a Spanish immersion teacher in DLI. The founding principals had experience
specifically relating to the design and initial implementation of DLI at their schools, whereas the
current principals could speak to the current implementation of DLI. The Spanish immersion
teachers were able to share their perspectives on the important KMO factors relating to
implementation of DLI at the classroom level and what they perceived as effective
implementation from administration.
35

Instrumentation
This study employed a semi-structured interview approach. A semi-structured approach
consists of open-ended questions that allows respondents to “define the world in unique ways”
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 109). The researcher could adapt questions and ask additional
probing questions as the emerging worldview of the interviewee was presented. The KMO model
guided the interview protocol as the researcher sought to answer the research questions regarding
knowledge, motivation, and organizational features of successful DLI programs (Clark & Estes,
2008). While the interview protocol applied to all the instructional and leadership personnel
within the school sites, there were differences in the abilities of interviewees to answer questions.
Founding principals were able to speak more to the initial development of shared vision,
recruitment, and other steps to create the program, while probing questions about current DLI
practices were more relevant for the current principals. Furthermore, all four principals were
more prepared to answer the questions relating to the organizational factors in depth. The
teachers however were equally prepared to answer the questions regarding knowledge and
motivational factors in the classroom. Due to these variances, the semi-structured interview
approach allowed principals and teachers to expound upon their exclusive experiences.
Data collection procedures
All interviews were conducted online through Zoom, a video conference application, due
to the current worldwide pandemic, COVID-19. The principals and teachers had the option of
communicating from the location of their preference with the suggestion that it have adequate
lighting and little to no ambient noise. Factors such as health and mood can potentially influence
the participant and the quality of their responses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Hence, the
researcher invited the participant to determine the most convenient day and time to maximize the
36

probability that the participants were at ease during the interview process. Weiss (1994)
recommends that interviews last less than an hour. Accordingly, the length of the interviews
ranged from about 30-45 minutes with a few interviews reaching or slightly exceeding one hour.
Data was collected via audiovisual recording. Patton (2015) notes verbatim recordings of
participant responses are indispensable for ensuring data accuracy. The researcher used the
Zoom recording feature and another recording app on their smartphone as backup. All interviews
were transcribed verbatim for analysis. The researcher took handwritten notes during all
interviews and all subjects consented to audio recording; however, the contingency plan was that
if the participant did not consent to the audio recording, the researcher would capture quotes
verbatim from the subjects. No translation services were needed as all interviews were completed
in English although some interviewees said a few phrases in Spanish. See Appendix A for
interview protocol.
Validity and Reliability
The credibility of the qualitative data collected through the interview process is
inextricably linked with the validity, which demonstrates the connection between research
findings and reality (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The researcher unavoidably influences their
study and interprets the data that cannot speak for itself. Therefore, the researcher implemented
strategies that Merriam and Tisdell (2016) propose to augment credibility. The researcher
conducted enough interviews so that the emergent findings became saturated, which Merriam
and Tisdell (2016) refer to as “adequate engagement in data collection” (p. 246). The researcher
also presented emergent findings of the study back to the interviewed subjects using respondent
validation, or member checks. Maxwell (2013) notes, “This is the single most important way of
ruling out the possibility of misinterpreting the meaning of what participants say and do and the
37

perspective that they have on what is going on, as well as being an important way of identifying
your own biases and misunderstanding of what you observed” (pp. 126-127).
Reliability in terms of qualitative research varies from the quantitative definition. In a
quantitative study, reliability refers to the degree of replicability of research findings. Replication
of a qualitative study will almost inherently end with different findings due to the transformation
of context and participants given that they age, learn, and change over time (Tracy, 2013).
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggest the use of an audit trail that is a log or journal explaining the
researcher’s process of conducting research and arriving at their results. The researcher
employed this recommended strategy by detailing a research journal that “describes in detail how
data were collected, how categories were derived, and how decisions were made throughout the
inquiry” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 252). This aided the researcher in utilizing reflexivity,
recognizing how the researcher and researcher process simultaneously affect each other, as
another strategy to increase trustworthiness of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
The validity and reliability of a qualitative research study are highly dependent upon the
researcher’s ethics. Foremost among the ethical considerations of the researcher is that they do
not cause harm and that they treat participants as “whole people rather than just subjects from
which to wrench a good story” (Tracy, 2013, p. 245). Before beginning data collection, the
researcher provided all participants with informed consent forms. Informed consent elucidated to
the participants that participation is voluntary, conversations are confidential, and they may
withdraw at any time without penalty (Glesne, 2011). The researcher sent each participant a
thank you email following the interview. The researcher adhered to IRB guidelines, which direct
38

when to provide consent forms to participants to protect confidentiality of collected data (Glense,
2011). After gaining permission, recorded conversations were secured with password protection.
The results of this study led to recommendations at a site and system level. These results
may be shared with instructional personnel at schools, school boards, school system level
leaders, and leadership from the state department of education. The findings may conflict with
the experience of leaders trained in the implementation of English Only curriculum and the
researcher’s bias towards DLI must be considered as well.

39

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this promising practices study was to learn from interviewing elementary
school principals and teachers of two existing DLI programs how to create and sustain a DLI
program. The theoretical framework for this study was the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model,
which focused on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors related to implementing
and sustaining a dual language immersion program. This chapter begins by providing an
overview of participants followed by findings and KMO factors related to this study. The
following three research questions guided this study:
1. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
knowledge factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual language
immersion program?
2. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
motivational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
3. What are the perceptions of elementary school principals and teachers regarding the
organizational factors and influences related to implementing and sustaining a dual
language immersion program?
Participants
Four principals and six teachers were interviewed for this study. Of the principals
interviewed, two were DLI program founding principals and two were the current principals of
those DLI programs. The decision to interview both the founding principals in addition to the
current principals was to collect more data about the establishment of the DLI programs, while
the current principals spoke more about continued implementation of their DLI programs. Due to
40

all but one of the participants being female, gender-neutral pseudonyms were selected to ensure
confidentiality of all subjects, specifically the one male subject. Table 5 provides the pseudonym
of each study participant along with a brief description.

41

Table 5
Pseudonyms and Descriptions of Principals and Teachers
Pseudonym Description
Skylar Skylar is the founding principal of the DLI program at LLA. Previous to this
position, they were a teacher and administrator at both the elementary and middle
school level. Currently, they serve as a director at a system level overseeing
multilingual education.
Channing Channing is the current principal at LLA. Prior to being principal, they worked
as a Mandarin DLI teacher and teacher on special assignment.
Remy Remy is the founding principal of BA. They previously worked as an elementary
teacher, reading specialist, EL coordinator, and elementary principal. They
currently serve as a coordinator of multilingual education at a system level.
Peyton Peyton is the current principal at BA. Prior to this position, they were a dual
language coordinator in another district and an elementary school DLI teacher
before that.
Casey Casey is a fifth year Spanish DLI teacher teaching fifth grade at LLA. They have
received a Master of Education in curriculum.
Angel Angel is an experienced Spanish DLI teacher at LLA that began their first
internship in 2000. Then they were deployed shortly following 9/11 as a reservist
and took some time off before teaching again. Angel has had two children in the
program.
Rene Rene began as a Spanish teacher in a bilingual program in 1997. They began
teaching at LLA in 2007 as a Spanish DLI teacher and stepped away from the
school for three years to be a project facilitator for middle school science
curriculum before returning to their same role as a DLI teacher.
Jessie Jessie taught Spanish DLI in Illinois for a few years and earned a Master of
Education in learning technologies. In 2018, they relocated to California to teach
DLI at BA. They currently teach Spanish DLI to third grade students.
Dani Dani is a 10th year teacher, who has been at BA teaching DLI since 2016.
Previously they taught in a project-based learning charter school in English. They
currently teach a transitional kindergarten/kindergarten combination class in
Spanish as a DLI teacher.
Jamie Jamie is a sixth year DLI teacher and has been at BA since 2018, sometimes
teaching as the English counterpart. Currently, they are a third grade Spanish
DLI teacher.

42

Findings
This section elaborates on the findings of the study as organized by the list of KMO
factors of the conceptual framework presented at the end of Chapter Two. Additional detail and
insights from the study not specifically mentioned in the conceptual framework are included in
order to more comprehensively answer the research questions of the study.
Knowledge Factors
The first research question sought to identify the knowledge factors and influences
related to the implementation of a DLI program according to the perceptions of elementary
school principals and teachers. There were two main knowledge factors identified in the
conceptual framework: knowledge of curriculum, assessment, and instruction; and awareness of
the impact of language proficiency on academic achievement.
Curriculum, Assessment, and Instruction
One of the primary knowledge factors required to implement a DLI program is to have
ample knowledge of available DLI curriculum including the assessment and effective
instructional strategies associated with it. All the principals and teachers, with the exception of
Peyton, demonstrated a general consensus that it was vital to know how to select a high-quality
Spanish curriculum available for teachers to be successful with their instruction and assessment.
Peyton suggested that curriculum would be more well-adapted to their school mission and vision
if they created their own curriculum; however, for those just implementing their own DLI
program, all of the other participants suggested that implementers need to become familiar with
available curriculum to select and purchase.
Curriculum Selection. Having the knowledge to be able to select a curriculum that
would appropriately meet the vision of the DLI program was considered essential by
43

participants; however, the participants also noted that curriculum selection was not generally
within their control. Skylar explained that the process of curriculum selection is determined at
the district level:
Well, we have committees and things like that, but a lot of that was done at the district
level. And so it's challenging when you're the one immersion school. Now there's more
[in our district], but at the time we were the one immersion school in a district of English-
only schools because the first lens that comes from the district is always what's the best
script for the whole district, not your immersion program. So, it's really advocating and
making sure your immersion teachers are part of all of those committees that make those
district level decisions so that you can get what you need.
All teachers shared an understanding of the curriculum selection process within a school district
although a couple teachers were less confident of their knowledge. For example, Casey
verbalized a lack of confidence even though they demonstrated a fair understanding of the
process despite having no firsthand participatory experience:
I actually wouldn't know for sure. I do know that some curriculum decisions, not all of
the curriculum we have, but for some of them, I know there's been committees as well,
but it has been decided upon so far as a district site level. And so more than one site was,
you know, we used to gather input from, and not all the sites have the same programs. So,
I will say that, but that's all I know.
Casey’s response reflected knowledge of the district’s role in curriculum selection and the
method of committee creation to gather input, which Skylar specifically identified as teacher
selection committees.
44

A few interviewees also noted that knowledge about curriculums can be obtained through
piloting programs prior to curriculum selection. Angel, Jessie, and Dani all spoke about how they
knew about teachers piloting curriculum before schoolwide implementation. Jessie was the only
one of the three that didn’t have personal experience but recalled, “You had one teacher piloting
one program, another teacher piloting the other. And then at the end of the year, they came
together and they discussed the pros and cons of each and they opted [for one].” This process of
curriculum selection is more time intensive due to the pilots lasting the entire school year, but
instructional teams were able to discuss pros and cons of each curriculum based upon actual
experience.
Dani mentioned that it was helpful when the curriculum came with many resources
including but not limited to “reading books, workbooks, worksheets, charts, puppets.” In
addition to resources provided in the curriculum, Remy expounded that curriculum itself is a
resource to use in instruction by sharing, “I think that curriculums that limit you, that shouldn't
be the case. You need to be using curriculum as a resource. Exactly that, as a resource that you
bring in as needed.” Channing also shared the sentiment of curriculum being a resource for
teachers and expounded further:
It's good to have a strong curriculum that they can pull from, doesn't mean they teach to
the curriculum but something, a backbone that defines [Kindergarten and] the
progression. Because, yes the teacher created materials are great but getting teachers all
aligned and calibrated K-5 sometimes it's hard because when you teach a second
language, you don't know, for Spanish there's different country, different words, different
vocabulary, different usage so if there's a solid curriculum, doesn't have to be perfect, but
a teacher gets to review and especially a native speaker teacher gets to review and go,
45

"Okay, this makes sense. This is actually a really good one." I think that would be a good
start, but then their complete thought process or mindset need to focus on the standards
and just understand that this is, if they need to know what first grade expectation or the
content expectation of the second grade, they know there's something that they have as a
guideline, that it's not what they live by.
Channing referred to the curriculum as a “guideline,” which contributes to vertical alignment of
curriculum, or the consistent articulation of desired student learning by grade level. Channing
details a simple process of curriculum selection, stressing that it “doesn’t have to be perfect,” but
that it should make sense to the teachers reviewing, “especially a native speaker teacher.” Dani, a
native Spanish-speaking teacher, echoed the idea brought up by Channing about the curriculum
review by a native speaker, because they shared that their current curriculum is “directly
translated, and it makes no sense.” Channing also recommends that the person selecting the
curriculum should verify that the curriculum is focused “on the standards.”
While all other respondents shared similar responses about curriculum selection, Peyton’s
reply varied from all other responses. Peyton suggested that instead of working to select a
curriculum, principals and teachers should “take curriculum, [and] throw it out the window.”
From there, Peyton encouraged that all instruction and learning should be focused on student
interests. When Peyton was asked about how they determined the curriculum that they
implement at their school, they replied with the following response that varied from all the other
responses:
This is a big one this year that we've been working on. Step one, take standards, throw
them out the window. Standards are limiting by themselves. Step two, get to know your
kids, understand who they are. Step three, support teachers in being able to build
46

frameworks and understandings that revolve around students' strengths, interests, and
passions, and around who they are and their values. So, what does that look like? Take
curriculum, throw it out the window, bring in students' interests, their values, their
strengths, their passions, their excitement, make that what you do and then revolve the
world around them. Right? So that's been a big part of shifting to competency-based
learning, is understanding who are our kids, right? And so that's been a tremendous shift,
right? For many of our teachers, leaving that world of standards and curriculum and
moving towards the world of understanding children and understanding who they are.
No other participant suggested that in order to establish a DLI program, that one should “throw
[curriculum] out the window;” however, the idea of designing instruction that “revolve[s] around
students’ strengths, interests, and passions” was supported by most of the teachers. Remy shared
a similar idea to Peyton’s in that they completely agreed that “student strengths, interests, skills,
and needs” should “run the [DLI] program.” They stated,
I feel that the curriculum shouldn't run the program. Student strengths, interests, skills,
and needs should be. Like your vision and your mission, that commitment you made to
your community is what needs to be running your programs. Obviously, we need to
adhere to standards so we can stay in business. And so, our kids are truly ready to
compete with other kids. So, we need that part. I think that when it comes to curriculums,
I understand the benefits behind having core curriculums at the state level that everyone
is expected to use. I understand that, and I've seen the reasons why that needs to be in
place in many systems.
Due to the legal mandate for public schools to teach according to standards, Remy recognized
that “we need to adhere to standards so we can stay in business.” They also acknowledged the
47

usefulness of curriculum as a resource and for continuity. Remy referred to the “benefits” of core
curriculums “at the state level” and “in many systems.” Channing brought up a district example,
at a “system” level, that referred to the same benefits Remy alluded to. Channing stated, “The
district [determines the curriculum] but that's just the core curriculum and sometimes honestly
the district doesn't have many choices, because they have to have the curriculum that's aligned to
the state standards.” Alignment to state standards is important for students to be “truly ready to
compete with other kids.” Channing shared that at the district level, the curriculum would be
chosen by “mainly [focusing] on the English, and then they find the Spanish version of it. So, it's
a little bit compromised, but at least the teacher knows the state standards, it's aligned though.”
When Channing stated that the curriculum was “a little bit compromised,” they were referring to
the “direct translation” of the curriculum that generally occurs, when selected with the main
focus of English-based curriculum.
As previously mentioned by Channing, all teachers and principals shared that the
curriculum does not have to be “perfect.” In fact, four of the teachers and two of the principals
used the following phrases: “there’s no curriculum that is perfect,”; “there’s not really a perfect
curriculum,”; “a solid curriculum doesn’t have to be perfect,”; “no curriculum is going to be
perfect,”; and “maybe it’s not a perfect fit.” It is important to have a standards-aligned
curriculum with a lot of resources for teacher use, but the stress is not in the acquisition of a
“perfect” curriculum, rather in how principals and teachers utilize the curriculum.
Effective Instructional Strategies. Teachers need to know effective instructional
strategies associated with their curriculum to be able to implement a successful DLI program.
One of the primary instructional strategies used within DLI is the Spanish immersion itself.
Immersion is not simply hearing all instruction in Spanish, but every word that the Spanish DLI
48

teacher says needs to be in Spanish. All principals and teachers stressed the importance of
knowing what immersion is and how to accomplish that in the classroom. Dani recalled, “When
you speak to them in Spanish all day, if they hear one English word from you, oh my God, it's a
whole thing.” In general, Dani and other DLI teachers do not speak at all in English, not even
“one English word” except for on accident. Rene agreed, “We, the models, we only speak
Spanish to the students. We don't speak English.” They continued with the following example:
So instead of saying, "Oh, zapato, shoe." No, have a picture of the zapato, of the shoe.
Because if you're mixing the English, that's one thing. You want to fully, fully immerse if
they're learning Spanish only. So that's one way.
Rene suggested using pictures of objects in order to keep teaching in Spanish so that children
“stop translating” and they can “acquire the language.” Channing referred to their himself as
“undercover forever,” because they spoke in the target language always so that students “had no
idea” that Channing spoke English. Channing shared their experience of using total physical
response (TPR), which involves using physical movement, facial expressions, and/or gestures to
associate with specific vocabulary or phrases. While Channing’s experience refers to their time
as a Mandarin DLI teacher, the instructional strategy also applies in Spanish DLI classrooms,
which given that they currently are principal of a school with a Spanish DLI program, it would
seem that the district agrees with that claim:
When it comes to immersion, the expectation is that kids don't ever hear the teacher
speaking English. So, I was a Mandarin teacher, they came, and they had no idea I spoke
English, I was undercover forever. And so, I have to use a lot of TPR, total physical
response, to make sure that when I say very dramatic, almost theater-like. "Oh, I'm
49

hungry" I will say in Chinese Mandarin, "I'm hungry" and they have to get these clues,
and guess what my message was.
When Channing said, “I’m hungry,” in Mandarin, they demonstrated on zoom an earnest
expression and rubbed their stomach with one hand. For the response part of TPR, Channing
would require students to repeat the phrase in Mandarin while making a similar expression and
doing the same gesture with their hand on their stomachs. To maintain comprehension during
immersion, Jessie said, “There's a lot of scaffolding, there's a lot of visuals, realia, students play
dress-up and they get to work with real objects to be able to acquire that language.” Scaffolding
instruction refers to the process whereby the teacher systematically builds upon the students’
initial understanding by providing aids in the learning and breaking the new lesson into smaller
portions of comprehensible input. In the DLI classroom, the initial understanding is often simply
the “visual” or “realia” and the teacher can tie the Spanish vocabulary to the physical object and
begin to use vocabulary relating to the physical item.
Jessie added that in addition to the teacher immersing the students in the language,
providing “lots of opportunity to practice it and encouraging the Spanish” was vital. Jessie also
explained that they implemented a system at their school where students “earn[ed] points for
speaking Spanish.” Jessie clarified that the purpose of rewarding students for practicing in
Spanish was to provide more opportunities for non-native speaking students to practice, because
“they go home and everything is in English.” Jamie added that “there's a lot of talking during our
lessons.” Jamie further described the students in lessons as “they're active all the time. They're
not passive learners.” Skylar spoke to the intentionality of having students practice the language
and that teachers should “really [think] about the productive use of the language and how kids
can really practice in safe ways and get feedback.” Skylar used the word “safe” in reference to
50

practicing in class, because the teacher will positively give them feedback without making
students feel poorly for making a mistake in the language. Safe, because there is nothing to fear,
and it is a risk for them to share when the teacher has created that type of environment. Active
engagement in the lesson through hands-on methods like TPR or through the act of discourse are
key to effective instruction.
Impact of Language Proficiency on Academic Achievement
As mentioned in the literature review and in the conceptual framework, it is important for
principal and teachers to understand how language proficiency in both Spanish and English
impacts academic achievement. This knowledge greatly impacts the success of the DLI program.
The last question of the interview protocol in Appendix A is as follows: Some people say that
dual language immersion programs detract from the focus of standardized assessments and could
thereby negatively impact overall school outcomes, what would you say to those people? The
answer to this question demonstrated the knowledge of the principals and teachers regarding the
impact of language proficiency on academic achievement. All of them answered in disagreement
with the devil’s advocate style question. Angel shared, “Look at the research. The research
shows that they struggle at the beginning… and the kids end up actually exceeding monolingual
students.” Rene simply answered, “Look at our test scores. That's all I have to say.” Indeed, the
test scores at LLA were exceptionally high, which served as a testament to Rene that improved
language proficiency attained through the DLI program would result in higher academic
achievement rather than compromise it. Jamie responded, “Gosh, I’m not sure I understand the
concern… it's not detracting from the content any more than a single language mode of teaching
that content.” Jessie felt similarly to Jamie and went into further detail in their response to the
question:
51

That's not true. I would say, "Show them the data." In the beginning, I did notice... that
there's a discrepancy, right? You have your native English speakers who are excelling
because if they come with a strong reading foundation in English, it's easy for them to be
able to pick up the Spanish. And so, you won't see any... How would you say, you won't
see it affecting them negatively, but for students who are learning English, if you
compare their English scores, yes, they're going to be low in the beginning, but as
students are acquiring this new language, they're able to make those cross-linguistic
connections and you'll eventually see that they will either be at their peer’s level or
surpass them. And that is shown across a lot of data.
Jessie demonstrated the understanding that higher English language proficiency would facilitate
higher achievement on standardized assessments. They also shared their belief that aligns with
Ardasheva et al. (2012) in that once ELs start to develop greater language proficiency in both
languages and are able to make “cross-linguistic connections,” those students will not only be at
the level of their native English-speaking peers, but potentially “surpass them.”
About the hypothetical nay-sayer, Remy answered, “Well, that they're not educated in
dual language obviously.” Remy continued to explain that “if we understand the research behind
dual language, then that wouldn't be an issue.” Skylar felt the same and included specific grade
levels in their response:
I would say, look at the research. Yes, we know that fourth and fifth graders are usually
where you start to see the shift. But in the lower grades, if you're looking at it and you're
not remembering that this is an immersion program and what the research has, so you
could maybe say, "Look, the third graders in the immersion program aren't doing as well
as the third graders in the English-only program." So, we should stop the immersion
52

program? No, look at the research. So, by fifth grade, they should be either at or ahead of
those students.
The benefits of DLI in academic achievement might not generally exceed the students in the
traditional English-only program in the first years, but they are much more likely in the fourth or
fifth grade and beyond as their language proficiency in both languages improves.
Summary of Knowledge Factors
Research question one asks, “What are the perceptions of elementary school principals
and teachers regarding the knowledge factors and influences related to implementing and
sustaining a dual language immersion program?” The knowledge findings section began with the
importance of curriculum, assessment, and instruction to implement a DLI program. While all
teachers and principals acknowledged that there was no “perfect” curriculum to select, all but
one principal agreed that having an understanding of the important components of curriculum
and how to select a curriculum that is standards-based was crucial. The most important
instructional strategies involved the use of physical objects, visuals, discourse, and TPR. These
strategies aided DLI teachers in maintaining all instruction in Spanish, which immersion is in the
very name of the model. The last factor about the knowledge of language impact on academic
achievement was identified by all principals and teachers unanimously and they all perceived it
as unequivocally salient and demonstrated their own knowledge of the impact of language on
their own students’ academic achievement.
Motivation Factors
The second question sought to identify the motivational factors and influences related to
the implementation of a DLI program according to the perceptions of elementary school teachers
and principals. As shown in the conceptual framework and detailed in the data, the factors
53

included: shared vision, commitment to bilingualism, translanguaging, and the benefits of
bilingualism.
Shared Vision
The creation of a shared vision provides an opportunity to collaborate and to align goals
and values with each other in an effort to collectively achieve a goal. The process of creating a
shared vision increases the investment that stakeholders feel and makes this an important
motivational factor for the implementation of a DLI program. DeMatthews & Izquierdo (2018)
share that the principal must be the one to lead both the school and community in the
development of the shared vision. The principal leads the development of the shared vision by
meeting with both staff and community. Peyton described what the gathering may look like. “So,
you have to have a lot of talking, a lot of conversations, a lot of dreaming.” Peyton continued to
share the unique experience of creating a shared vision with staff and families:
A lot of times in education, we don't give them a platform to share… So, you have to
give them the ability to do that. And then you have to follow through with it. That's the
key and make sure those things come to vision.
Skylar very much advocated for giving all stakeholders the “platform to share” as well. They
describe their process of developing a shared vision as the human-centered approach to
continuous improvement:
Just being, I guess, human-centered in your approach for continuous improvement. So we
use design thinking… It's a way to look at continuous improvement, but really thinking
about the human being at the center of the system. So, teachers, parents, students, staff,
how are they feeling? What input are you getting from them? What feedback are you
getting from them? Are you staying human-centered? You try to really design those
54

qualities and improve those programs. Don't just sit in your office and try to do it
yourself. You really need everyone with you as your partner.
Despite Skylar’s vast experience, certifications, and doctorate that focused on multilingual
education, or perhaps because of, Skylar advised DLI implementers to solicit feedback and
receive input from staff and parents. In the creation of shared vision, partnership from all
stakeholders is paramount especially the staff and parents.
Staff buy-in. For a DLI program to be successful, it is important for staff to be bought
into the shared vision. Staff buy-in begins long before most staff are employed at the school due
to their prior experiences and preparation that draw them to the position. Jamie shared:
Well, I think by virtue of applying for the position, I think there's a certain amount of
interest in it. And being that the requirement is that you do have, well, they used to call it
a BCLAD. I think they've changed it now, but you have some kind of some kind of
studies, and certificates to qualify for the position, and to be bilingual yourself. I think
there's some awareness of the advantages, and the challenges of being bilingual, but just
that you, by virtue of applying for the position you're already seeing a benefit to that.
That would be the main thing.
Given the prerequisites of being both bilingual, certified to teach DLI, and taking the initiative to
apply for the DLI position, it follows that the staff member may already be bought in without the
principal having to exert themself. Rocque et al. (2016) noted that principals must include non-
DLI teachers in addition to the DLI teachers in the process of creating the shared vision so that
they can feel invested in the school vision and join into some extent. At LLA, DLI initially began
with just a few teachers and Rene was part of the cohort that came in the second year of the
program’s expansion. Rene recalled, “It was challenging at first, because they thought we were
55

taking over the school, and we were not taking over.” After sharing more of the fear, Rene
concluded that “things are much better now.” When asked about how that happened, Rene
replied almost comically, “The English staff is no longer here.” There was no discussion about
this with Skylar, the founding principal of LLA; however, this process suggests that another way
to create unity around a shared vision is to transition out those that do not support the shared
vision.
At BA, Remy did not have to make the transition from a traditional elementary school
into a DLI elementary school as Skylar, Channing, and their teachers had to. In Remy’s district,
they were able to design and open a school that was focused around DLI. Jessie shared that the
teaching staff, principal, and all but one of the support staff members at BA were bilingual and
onboard with the shared vision of the DLI program:
Our front office staff, all of them are bilingual. Our seekers, which are our teacher
assistants, they're all bilingual. Even our nurse is bilingual. And that's something that
[Remy] fought really hard for, "We are a dual language school, we need people who
speak both languages." I think the only person who doesn't speak Spanish would be our
custodian. Our former custodian was bilingual and then our cafeteria manager, but
everybody else, yeah. We try to only hire bilingual staff because they understand.
Given the design of the DLI programs becoming central to the vision of the whole school at both
LLA and BA, the staff is able to buy-in more easily and contribute to the shared vision. Careful
selection at the hiring phase by requiring the BCLAD for teaching staff and preferring bilingual
status for the support staff seems to be the main strategy implemented at both campuses to attract
already bought-in staff or staff that may be more prone to agreeing with the dual language
philosophy.
56

Parent buy-in. The motivational component of parent buy-in is fundamental to the
success of most school programs and all principals and teachers identified parent buy-in to be
vital to the development of a shared vision. The literature reviewed indicated that parent
involvement was an important factor in the success of students at schools in general (Jung &
Zhang, 2016; LeFevre & Shaw, 2012; McCormick et al., 2013; McNeal, 2015) and also for DLI
programs (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008). While parents are not explicitly mentioned in the
conceptual framework or the interview protocol in Appendix A, the degree to which parent buy-
in was mentioned by participants is merit enough to include parent buy-in as an essential
motivational factor. Parents and their motivational influence were mentioned 122 times total by
the participants in the 10 interviews. Remy explains some first steps to take with parents
regarding shared vision:
When we think about parents, we want to bring in those parents who are interested and
those who aren't interested because we want to know why they aren't interested. We want
to know if we could influence their thinking, but we also want to know where they're
coming from. So then in our design and our funding, we can address their needs and
hopefully bring some of those parents who aren't up for it now, eventually bring them
into being able to benefit from this type of opportunity.
Remy’s plan to meet with both interested and uninterested parents to learn from them about their
perspectives was intended to lead to improving design to buy-in more parents. Skylar took an
informational approach to creating buy-in with parents by first providing an informational parent
night. Skylar invited a professor from the local university to share about the cognitive and
neurological benefits of bilingualism and DLI. Angel recalled attending one of those initial
parent nights as a parent of prospective students prior to working at LLA:
57

We would invite parents to parent night and we would be in the auditorium and [they]
would bring a professor that would teach the parents about the amazing things that, these
are from professors that are bilingual or multilingual, who also do research on
multilingual bilingual brains explaining what it does to the brain. And when you would
hear those presentations, you were in awe.
Bringing in expert help to increase the knowledge of the parents regarding the benefits of DLI
also improved the motivation and buy-in for parents. Rene, who started at LLA in 2007, recalled,
“The parents, they're the ones that started the program. They're the ones that went and told
[other] parents. And it has to be the enthusiasm of the parents.” Once some parents are invested,
they begin to share with others. Efforts to increase motivation for some parents can have a
multiplicative effect as they share their “enthusiasm” with other parents and community
members.
Parent buy-in was also achieved through the use of effective mass communications. Dani
shared their perspective on the beginnings of BA:
The first year of the school, it was a little bit smaller. I think it was kinder through third.
But we bought them in by bringing parents into the community, and then we just blasted
tweets out, and we would tweet everything, and we would have little drive-bys with
balloons and stuff. And we really made our presence known.
LLA was established before social media marketing became widespread for public school
districts, but since BA was established much more recently, the staff took advantage of that
medium by “tweet[ing] everything.” Dani continued with an echo of Rene's last comment, “And
those parents started telling other parents, and then other parents started telling other parents.”
After all of the initial meetings and marketing with parents, Peyton brought up how they will
58

meet with parents in an open forum on a weekly basis, sometimes “two to three times a week,”
which Peyton even recognized could be an “obsessive amount,” but they wanted to allow parents
to be involved. When asked about the length of the meetings, Peyton explained,
A lot of times I'll just do a check-in and just say, "Hey! What questions do you have?
What do you want to know about? What do you need?" And those can be ranging from a
half hour, or if it's a big thing, I've had them up to like two, three hours, right? It just
depends on what's needed. And what that looks like.
In these frequent meetings, parents are able to provide feedback from their perspective and also
to have a dialogue with the principal and any other staff members that decide or are asked to
participate. These meetings, the initial parent meetings, the social media marketing, and word of
mouth all help create parent buy-in and allow them to contribute to the shared vision of the DLI
program.
Commitment to Bilingualism
An important component from the conceptual framework and literature review is
commitment to bilingualism. Alanis and Rodriguez (2008) shared that the principal’s
commitment to bilingualism is one of the critical success factors for a DLI program. That
commitment affects the teachers and parents, which in turn affects the commitment of the
students to bilingualism. When the principals were asked about their thoughts on bilingualism,
they each gave an impassioned response. Channing said, “I believe in bilingualism, I'm a full
blown bilingual.” Channing followed up by sharing that they believe that all students can benefit
from becoming bilingual. Skylar responded, “Bilingualism is a complete and total asset for
students.” Skylar, who is trilingual with some conversation level skill in additional languages,
models the commitment through the value they place on the acquisition of multiple languages.
59

Remy, who had more EL students in their program at BA than Skylar and Channing at LLA,
answered with the perspective of maintaining and retaining the bilingualism that EL students
sometimes lose as they learn English:
I like to think about the personal benefits that it brings to our kids and our families when
we're able to maintain and nurture their primary language. So, if you lose your language,
you lose your opportunity to have that family support that it's so essential to student
success and to your success as a human being.
Remy’s initial thoughts on bilingualism was to maintain the linguistic contact with Spanish-
speaking family members such as mom or grandma that may speak little to no English. Remy
continued comparing the EL student to a tree that is connected to the roots through language:
If you lose that link with your roots, with your heritage, it's a tree or a plant without
roots. And we know that that doesn't go anywhere. And that's a metaphor that's been
overly used, I'm sure, but that's the first thing that came to mind. So, we need those roots
to be able to be who we are meant to be, who we want to be. And staying grounded and
staying rooted in who you are, who you've been and who you are today, and who you
could be tomorrow given the right opportunities. It's essential for our growth, again, as
human beings in any aspect of our lives.
Remy’s strong response was made in stark contrast to the bilingually subtractive programs,
mentioned in the literature review, that aim to only assist students in achieving proficiency in
English without sufficient focus on content or retention of the native language.
Peyton’s response to the question about their thoughts on bilingualism also began quite
distinctly, but indicated a strong commitment to bilingualism/multilingualism. Peyton began with
60

a diatribe about how bilingualism itself was a “US invention” due to the “rest of the world
speak[ing] multiple.” They then circled back to answer,
So, bilingualism is good, in a nutshell. It's needed. California obviously has moved very
strongly towards that direction and understanding that it's no longer something that can
be just thought about. It has to be something that's very much a reality in the educational
system, and most states are moving in that direction anyways. So that’s a good thing.
Peyton’s stance on bilingualism and belief that they are doing what the “most states” will be
doing demonstrates that they are not only committed to bilingualism, but convinced of its
indispensability.
Skylar spoke about one of the ways to inspire commitment to the development and
process of bilingualism in parents was to begin with a “clear explanation of what an immersion
program is and what type of commitment it takes.” Remy and Peyton also talked about having a
similar initial meeting and informal check-ins throughout the year; however, Skylar explained
that they “made it a practice to have those every year and have parents recommit every year and
students recommit every year, and staff recommit every year.” Each year, Skylar met with each
grade level of teachers and their corresponding students and parents to go over the expectations
of what the students would learn specifically that school year. Following the meeting Skylar
would have them sign a compact:
We had a compact that we signed down to the student to do their part, parents to do their
part, and the staff to do their part. I think that was really something that helped us have
clear, transparent ongoing access and communication.
While the commitment referred to in the literature review was more of a conviction demonstrated
by actions, Skylar had everyone literally commit in writing to working towards bilingualism.
61

Translanguaging
Although translanguaging was never mentioned in the interview protocol specifically and
no principal or teacher used the term translanguaging, the concept was still shared within the
context of a motivational influence. Menken and Sánchez (2019) note that translanguaging leads
to increased linguistic connections and higher academic achievement for students. Principals and
teachers can be motivated by their firsthand experiences and when they witness this in their
students. Dani shared a very consistent example and referred to their process of translanguaging
as using their second knowledge, language, or brain:
For example, I never have been able to spell because, but if I phonetically sound it out in
Spanish, I can spell. And there's a lot of ways where you can use your second knowledge,
or your second language, or your second brain to form those bridges and fill those gaps to
get you where you need to go... The most important thing is the skills you use to get to
that information.
The skills that Dani uses to spell are the phonetic sounds of the Spanish alphabet. Cross language
phonetic spelling is not a required or even intended function of being bilingual, but a bilingual
individual will begin to make connections across languages to be able to resolve issues that they
confront.
Translanguaging can also occur when people blend both languages while speaking, which
when people talk about Spanish and English, they colloquially refer to it as Spanglish. Casey
shared about the great opportunity that this provides students:
There's a lot of benefits I think in the way students are able to express what they think,
because now they have more than one avenue to speak it in. If they can't put what they're
thinking in into words in Spanish, some of them can resort to the English that they know
62

socially from home or reverse. So, I think in that sense it's been very helpful. It's almost
like a tool like, "Oh, I don't remember how to say this, but at least there's a language I can
say it in."
Students are able to speak in both languages alternating when necessary to express themselves.
When the focus is on student expression of ideas, having multiple “avenue[s] to speak it in” can
be very beneficial for both the educator and the student involved in the conversation. As students
transition from Spanglish to being able to use two distinct languages, they can begin to recognize
cognates across the languages. Jamie shared,
A lot of times some of the techniques I use in class is, well, we know what this word
means in Spanish. Castigar is a very common word in Spanish, but castigate is a much
more sophisticated sounding word in English.
Translanguaging will not only expand the vocabulary in both languages, but in close languages
like Spanish and English, it may elevate the vocabulary of the learner as they use cognates that
are high frequency words in one language and low frequency words in the other.
Remy referred to the transfer of skills across languages even when the content is only
learned in one of the languages. Remy shared specifically about Spanish-speaking EL students,
“The more you know about how to do or play school, the more you know about the academics
and your primary language, the more you have to use as that foundation to transfer into the
English language.” EL students learning in Spanish is helpful for the student’s overall
development and learning and can still contribute to knowledge in the English language as
evidenced by the above average test scores from both schools despite the majority of the
instruction being in Spanish and all state assessments being administered in English.
Benefits of Bilingualism
63

One of the motivational factors that principals and teachers referred to frequently were
the benefits of bilingualism. While the benefits of bilingualism are vast, there were two specific
benefit areas that were repeated more frequently in the interviews. Bilingualism benefits students
by giving them opportunities to connect with others and provides cognitive and academic
benefits. Opportunities to connect with others were described in two distinct ways. All of the
principals and teachers brought up the idea that students who attain bilingualism are able to
connect with people in both English and Spanish as well as the cultures related to each. The other
aspect of connection was specifically for the native Spanish speaking students and referred to
earlier in the commitment to bilingualism section. That emphasis was on the retention of Spanish
and improving it to be able to better connect with their Spanish-speaking family and cultural
heritage.
Connecting with others. All principals and teachers shared their belief and testimonials
about the opportunities for connection that students would receive by participating in DLI. Jessie
stated, “I think by being able to know two languages and communicate with not just people in
this country, it makes you competent at a global level. And it also opens your eyes in terms of
cultural differences.” Dani also included the idea of other countries stating, “You can really open
up your options if you want to travel, if you want to live somewhere else if you speak another
language.” Peyton also agreed by saying, “It creates a sense of commonality with the world and
knowing who you are within that world.” Perhaps that statement is more about introspection and
connecting yourself with the concept of the world, but seems to follow the same line of thinking.
In a very candid moment with Remy, they shared an experience of how students
connected with each other even though they came from very diverse backgrounds. They recall
supervising recess and seeing a native Spanish-speaking EL student, a native English-speaking
64

White student, and a native English-speaking African-American student interacting. The
experience went as follows:
All three, they're talking about something and it's something that they're so into it. And
then my EL kid has a bag of hot Cheetos. And they’re obviously pre-COVID time,
everyone was putting their hand in the bag of hot Cheetos and eating the Cheetos. You
can tell that they're all enchilados, and they're all having the hot Cheetos experience that I
still have even at my age. For me, I will never forget that. It's like really every time I
think of that, I get emotional because that's why we do the work. It's connecting like that
over a bag of hot Cheetos. I know that's super stupid, but on my hot Cheetos side, that
bag of hot Cheetos to me meant culture and connections. And that's why we do what we
do every day, so kids can have their life.
As Remy finished the story, their emotions shown in tears, they revealed a fundamental
motivator for the work they do in DLI while also sharing the connection between three students
that may not otherwise have connected to become friends.
Cognitive and Academic Benefits. All 10 interview participants spoke very highly of
the cognitive and academic benefits of bilingualism gained through DLI. In the literature review,
there was considerable evidence to suggest long-term cognitive and academic benefits that
students experience, but Skylar identified that the benefits to cognition begin almost
immediately:
When I was a principal at [another elementary] where there was no bilingual program, I
would walk into kindergarten classes and kids would be misbehaving. And I really think
it was because they were bored and not getting a lot of engagement. When I would walk
into kindergarten classes in the immersion program and they're having to make sense of a
65

new language, they're completely paying attention. You could just see the little wheels in
there. They're paying a lot of attention and it's just amazing. It almost felt like a miracle
to see how well and easily students acquired language at a young age.
The cognitive benefits were observable through the behavior that Skylar witnessed in their visits
to the classrooms, specifically they noticed the contrast between the kindergarten classes of
traditional elementary and a DLI elementary both of which they were the principal. Channing
shared a similar situation in which they witnessed engagement and recognized it as students
trying to constantly problem solve, because they are in “survival mode.” Channing described
“survival mode” saying, “They have to be aware of things because they're constantly trying to
figure things out so it's kind of their brain is always working.” Keeping the brain “always
working” may first be observable in the behaviors of the students in the classroom, but over the
years, Peyton has added that “they end up outperforming their peers by far. And that's what our
program has demonstrated time and time again.”
Even after the elementary years, Casey mentions that they have been very proud of their
past students that ended up qualifying to enroll in honors classes at the middle and high school
levels and they were “well-rounded individuals too.” Angel shared, “My son that is in high
school right now is top 10 of 465 students in his [class]. And all top 10 students are from our
program.” Angel’s claim was astounding and an impressive snapshot of the success of their
school’s DLI program. Skylar also shared about students from their school continuing in a well-
supported district “pass high levels of AP and IB language exams,” which participation alone is
beneficial in preparation for college, and passing them all the more remarkable.
Summary of Motivational Factors
66

The perceptions of the principals and teachers regarding the motivational factors for
implementing and sustaining a DLI program indicated four important influences: shared vision,
commitment to bilingualism, translanguaging, and benefits of bilingualism. The shared vision is
only possible when the staff and parents are able to buy-in to the premise of the principal's vision
and then they need to be able to share their thoughts and dreams for the vision as well. Staff buy-
in is most easily obtained by hiring bilingual staff that have already completed coursework and
obtained certification to bilingually instruct students, such as a BCLAD in California. Parent
buy-in is very much linked to the knowledge they have of the program, the marketing of the
program, and the experiences they personally have or hear from other parents. Commitment to
bilingualism at a staff level is often demonstrable through the conviction of not only their talk
about bilingualism, but the actions they take to propagate bilingualism. As students and staff
experience translanguaging, they experience the additive effect of having access to two
languages to facilitate learning and expression. Finally, the two main benefits of bilingualism
that nearly all principals and teachers discussed was that bilingualism allowed students to
connect with others and they received cognitive and academic benefits immediately in the short-
term and lasting benefits over the long-term.
Organizational Factors
The third question sought to identify the organizational factors and influences related to
the implementation of a DLI program according to the perceptions of elementary school teachers
and principals. Similar to the knowledge and motivational sections of the first two research
questions, the KMO model and conceptual framework were used as a reference, along with the
factors identified in the literature review and interviews with principals and teachers. The factors
identified previously in the literature review included the following: student recruitment; teacher
67

recruitment; effective bilingual teachers; progress monitoring of academic achievement and
Spanish language; and professional development for principals and teachers.
Student Recruitment
The principals and teachers noted that the process of student recruitment was vital in the
implementation of a DLI program. All of the teachers spoke about recruitment in terms of word
of mouth and social media marketing. Angel and Rene both brought up a community event that
was an international fair where students present ethnic or culturally related performances. LLA
assigned each grade level of students to prepare a dance from another country. This attracted
positive attention from other parents in the community to enroll at LLA. Angel explained that at
another school in the past, they went with an office staff member to the local preschools to share
about DLI at their school and recruit those students for kindergarten, since many “parents aren’t
even aware of these programs or really understand the benefits of these programs.” Remy also
recommended targeting the local preschools:
You want to bring in your preschool directors or whomever is running preschool within
your district. So, we can start early and really begin to nurture that interest in being
bilingual and biliterate, not only in our students, but our families.
Creating a sustainable pipeline of students from the local preschools is a simple, but effective
option for student recruitment.
Remy also spoke about the student recruitment process when BA was founded. They
explained that selection of the leader representing the program is crucial:
I think that the face that promotes dual language is very important. And I think that the
face that you select will have a significant impact on who comes in and who does not,
especially as you're establishing the program... I was the EL director for a school district
68

for so many years, my English learner families knew me and trusted me. And I obviously
can't generalize because I didn't know him all. But the leaders in the community knew
who I was and trusted me. So, I was a good face for that EL community.
While Remy was effective in advertising to the EL community in their district, the district also
appointed the Assistant Superintendent of Educational Services to represent the program to the
“White, middle-class” demographic. Remy shared, “In those first steps, it really helped to have
those two faces because we were definitely reaching out to the two aspects of who you want to
bring into your community.” It is ideal to have a composition of native Spanish speakers and
native English speakers that is approximately equal, but each demographic should comprise at
least ⅓ of the total class population (CAL, 2020).
Remy further expounded that the messages that the parents of native English-speaking
students wanted to hear differed from the messages that parents of native Spanish-speaking
students wanted to hear. Remy shared,
English only parents want to hear that their kids are going to be okay, and that they will
be able to become bilingual and biliterate. Your EL parents also want to hear ELs
speaking English fluently. They want to hear ELs sharing their success stories, and they
want to hear EL parents doing the same. They want to hear from EL parents that their
kids are in fact fluent speakers of language and there are students who are reaching high
levels of academic achievement. So, they want to hear that not from you. They want to
hear it from other users, from other people you've observed have been part of the system.
Remy explained that they facilitated these desired opportunities by finding parents of other
successful programs to calm the concerns and verify that the hope and dream of the program was
possible. One of the concerns that Skylar heard with the first matriculating class of students was
69

that their children were guinea pigs. Skylar responded, “You're not guinea pigs, you're pioneers."
That simple rephrasing transformed the risk to participate for some families from experiment to
expedition.
Channing and Peyton both shared the maintenance type of student recruitment. Channing
shared that word of mouth from staff and current families is all they need to continue to maintain
their large enrollment. Peyton explained that they advertise both through traditional methods and
social media:
I got billboards all around [town], specifically around other schools that I know that we
can pull from. I have a lot of videos that we send out, a lot of social media, a lot of
tweets, a lot of things like that.
Both of them and the teachers acknowledge that student recruitment at this point of their
programs is not as difficult and therefore a much smaller concern than at the beginning of the
school DLI programs.
Teacher Recruitment
In addition to the recruitment of students, teacher recruitment was addressed as another
important organizational factor for the implementation of a DLI program. Three teachers and one
principal began with the answer that jobs were posted on EDJOIN, which in the title of the
website self-proclaims to be “The Nation’s #1 Education Job Board.” The three teachers that
brought up EDJOIN also acknowledged that that is how they first found the posting for the
position that they currently hold. All four principals gave very different answers to the question
on teacher recruitment. They previously did mention that BCLAD licensure and being bilingual
were minimum requirements for the teaching staff, but their take on the question varied.
70

Channing spoke about ideally finding teachers that already have experience teaching in
the target language and placing the emphasis there over just proficiency in the language. They
explained,
I think it's better to start with someone if ideally, they have experience… Just because we
all speak English doesn't mean we can be great English teachers. So, if we're looking to
grow the program and keep the quality of the program, I think we still need to keep in
mind that just because they speak that language doesn't mean they're the right fit.
Four of the teachers verified that in the interviews that they have participated in, the principals
asked questions to gauge both their teaching philosophy and experience as well as questions in
Spanish to assess their language proficiency. Peyton made a unique recommendation that
principals should develop a relationship with the credentialing programs in the area where the
school districts are already systematically recruiting teachers. Peyton coordinates with the
leadership of the credentialing programs at the local universities and community colleges in
order to do a “lecture series” at all those campuses. Peyton shared,
And I sort of come in, which is the topic that they want anyways. And typically, having a
principal coming in and talking to their students about that very quickly gets in. Right?
And so that's sort of my loophole to get into those programs. And then what I use it for is
I look for specific people who are, off the dot, you can tell they're good. And then I email
them and I say, "Hey, here's the application. Here's what I want to do. Here's how you're
going to get a job." And that's how I get my people.
Peyton leverages their positionality to have access to where potential new teachers are being
educated and prepared. The obvious perk of being able to reach out and directly recruit
candidates from their “lecture” is convenient, and the opportunity to build stronger ties with the
71

schools that can aid in placement of student teachers and interns is an added benefit that Skylar
alludes to as well. Skylar shared, “Just [look] for those key community language partners and
higher ed organizations that can help give you that pipeline of teachers.”
Skylar didn’t talk about any staffing needs or concerns with the Spanish DLI; however,
they also developed a DLI program in Mandarin at LLA and that was significantly more difficult
for them to get off the ground. Skylar explained, “Literally for Chinese, I prayed. Praying was a
strategy. Having someone live with me for six months as they worked was another. Literally
whatever it took.” Skylar’s answer implies that when there is scarcity, that is the time to be
creative and potentially unconventional. When Remy previously talked about recruiting students,
they referred to themselves as a “good face” for the EL community. Remy continued with the
same terminology for teacher recruitment. They said, “I was also a good face for the certificated
and classified staff who we needed to be on board to be able to launch this, for those who had
worked with ELs now.” Remy was able to pull from previous contacts and those that knew them
in the district due to their previous position as an EL director of the district prior to opening BA.
Effective Bilingual Teachers
Having effective bilingual teachers is a vital organizational resource impacting the
success of the DLI program. Given the above average results that both LLA and BA have
achieved, it seems to suggest that the teachers on the campuses are effective bilingual teachers
and that their principals can recognize them as well due to their selection and supervision of
these teachers. The themes that emerged around effective bilingual teaching were the following:
equivalent instructional rigor in both languages; and utilizing time for preparation, planning, and
collaboration. Each theme was supported by all 10 participants’ responses although the specific
strategies and philosophies around each theme varied.
72

Equivalent Instructional Rigor in Both Languages. In both LLA and BA, the schools
employed the 90-10 model which required a minimum of 90% of instruction in Spanish and 10%
in English at the Kindergarten level. In the 90-10, each year the school may decide to decrease
the Spanish 10% and increase the English by 10% or keep it the same with a lowest Spanish
percentage being 50%, resulting in a 50-50 model. At LLA, the decrease came every two years
resulting in a 70-30 split by fifth grade. At BA, the language alternation arrived at 50-50 by
fourth grade and remained 50-50 in fifth grade as well. Despite the amount of time instructing in
either language, Alanis and Rodriguez (2008) advocated that the rigor should be maintained in
both languages of instruction for maximum efficiency. For nine of the participants, adherence to
state standards for instruction was cited as their method for guaranteeing rigorous instruction in
both languages. Casey said,
We have the standards, we have expectations, we have certain goals for students. And I
think when you're in an immersion school, you have all those in mind. So, you're
thinking, "Oh, I'm going to do all that. I'm just going to do it in Spanish."
Casey did not say that they would make something simpler in Spanish due to the language
proficiency, but that they would teach in Spanish according to the standards even though the
standards are written in English. Angel added, “We expect our students to be at the same
standards in Spanish as they are in English. That's our expectations. Most of the time the students
are meeting them or exceeding them.” Channing shared the same philosophy as Angel about the
standards expectations across languages. Channing shared, “They're still being held accountable
for their grade level standards, their math, science, social studies and everything that a regular
normal mainstream English student would experience in an English classroom, we just deliver
that in a different language.”
73

Utilizing Time for Preparation, Planning, and Collaboration. The theme of utilizing
time for preparation, planning, and collaboration came from all teachers and principals of the
sample. Rene referenced the focus on standards and how to plan according to the standards. Rene
said,
We're planning, "Okay, how can we align the standards?" So, we look at the standards.
How can we align the story with the language standards and the science standards, and
social studies? So, we can put it all together and teach a unit.
This type of planning that spans multiple standards and academic disciplines is known as cross-
curricular planning and it requires ample time to “put it all together” to be ready to teach. Angel
also shared about the need for planning according to the standards:
We need to make sure we get the standards in there… There's so much that we're trying
to fit in, but planning it out effectively and ensuring that the teachers are aware of what
they're doing, and how they're doing, and why they're doing it, is important.
All the principals stressed the importance of planning and collaboration. Remy stated, “You need
to provide ample time for your teachers to be able to collaborate and engage in meaningful
planning.” That statement does not necessarily indicate that preparation and planning create
effective bilingual teachers, but it may even indicate that as principals provide time for teachers
to collaborate and plan, the teachers become more effective. Skylar echoed, “We really need a lot
of time for teachers to design and meet, and plan, and organize, and calibrate. So more than in a
regular school.” Skylar emphasized that DLI teachers need even more time to meet and plan than
at a traditional elementary school due to the need to calibrate with the English partner teacher in
addition to all of the normal planning and organizing that all teachers must do.
Progress Monitoring of Academic Achievement and Spanish Language
74

To be able to measure the success of the DLI program, the organizational factor of
progress monitoring of both academic achievement and the Spanish language must be in place.
All of the teachers and three of the four principals expressed the fundamental nature of progress
monitoring in both academic content and the Spanish language to ensure the DLI program’s
success. Skylar shared from the inverse perspective if progress monitoring does not occur in the
DLI program:
Now, the downside, if it's not done right, it's not done correctly, immersion programs, if
there isn't a close, "I kept on how students are progressing," I think it can at times be
counterproductive. So it's really important to keep an eye on the outcomes that you're
hoping students achieve both academically and linguistically and in the target language
and in English, so that you can ensure that they're on a trajectory for success.
The tracking of both academic and linguistic growth and achievement is vital to the measurement
and determination of the success of the entire program.
Both schools administer standardized interim assessments that are aligned to the state
mandated end of year assessment that measures achievement in mathematics and English
language arts. The main purpose of administering interim assessment aligned to the state
mandated assessment, apart from helping students be aware of test style and content, is to receive
formative data that allows the teachers and principals to reflect on what students know or do not
know. Remy explained that teachers and principals should “look at data in disaggregated ways
that allow for us to inform our next steps.” Those next steps can include school level initiatives
for widely identified deficiencies or by class or even at the student intervention level. Channing
explained the process of progress monitoring would include teaching a standard, assessing, and
75

gathering data about student growth and achievement. After the data is gathered, Channing
explained,
Then you can kind of reflect on the program. "Okay, are we going in the right direction?
Are we growing as our student’s language is growing, that growth is making sense?" If
the data says, "No, no it's so off from the standard,” then we need to do something about
our internal instructional planning.
Progress monitoring requires looping back to the planning in order to make up for deficits or to
determine next steps of instruction. Remy also brought up that student involvement in progress
monitoring is a very important part of the process as well. They stated,
Motivating them, nurturing their identities as learners, making them responsible and
accountable for their next steps by bringing them into the design and incorporating ways
for them to establish their own goals and monitor their own growth.
Empowering learners to self-monitor their own growth and be involved in the decision-making
process of their learning can create a systematic way to motivate students towards improvement
and higher levels of success. Progress monitoring can include smaller assessments apart from the
longer interim standardized assessments. Dani spoke from the perspective of teaching
kindergarten and transitional kindergarten and how they track early progress of language
mastery. Dani shared,
We have the sounds, letters, letter sounds, syllables, simple words from simple
syllables… But the whole year, we're checking sounds first and syllables, and then
putting those syllables together to form two syllable words. And then from those words,
we do the high-frequency words.
76

Much of the in-class progress monitoring assessment options can come from the curriculum or
are teacher created so that teachers have a pulse on the progress of their students throughout the
school year.
Casey shared their perspective from teaching fifth grade where students have moved
much beyond phonics and high frequency words. In fifth grade, the assessments became reading
comprehension checks with three major individual “check-in points” throughout the school year.
Three of the principals and Casey, the only 5th grade teacher interviewed, brought up the
Assessment of Performance toward Proficiency in Languages (AAPPL) test that is only
administered in 5th grade and can be done again every few years following when there is an
articulated DLI program after elementary school. The AAPPL test contains three parts including
speaking, listening, and writing. Due to COVID, the test can now be administered remotely, but
in the past, this was performed in person. While students take the AAPPL test around the end of
their time in elementary school and are assigned a rating of fluency, it can be positive feedback
for the school to measure the level of fluency students achieve by the time that they complete the
program as they review potential programmatic improvements.
Professional Development
Professional development is an organizational factor that school principals can
completely control and regulate, and its impact can be far-reaching. All principals and teachers
shared that professional development was important both initially and ongoing over the course of
the school year and year after year. While they all expressed their feelings towards the
significance of professional development, they varied in the amount that they personally
experienced. Principals and teachers relayed more about the professional development that was
delivered initially prior to establishing the DLI program or prior to new staff being onboarded.
77

Initial Professional Development. Remy shared, “A lot of that needs to come at the
beginning. It needs to come before you open your doors, and you say that you're providing dual
language instruction.” Skylar shared about the initial professional development and referred to it
as key:
They advocated for professional development both for the principal and the teachers:
The site leader needs professional learning on how to really develop, run, support, sustain
quality programs. Any teacher, first of all, needs to really understand how immersion
works and how to design a quality program, how to do things like make content
comprehensible, for example, in a different language, how to help give kids the language
to participate so that they can give evidence or make a claim and use the target language,
and that they know how that language works. So, the grammar and syntax of the
language. And thinking about when you, if you've ever taken a different language, it's
really hard to put yourself out there and take a risk when you're afraid of making a
mistake and maybe sounding wrong to the teacher or sounding wrong to others. So really
giving kids safe spaces, lowering that affective filter.
As Skylar mentioned previously that teachers should focus on practice and provide “safe spaces”
for students to practice, they also acknowledged that teachers would need prior training on how
to lower affective filters to create the “safe spaces.” The affective filter refers to the learner’s
attitude and feelings about their relative success or failure in secondary language acquisition.
When the affective filter is lower, students generally feel more comfortable to produce in the
target language. Skylar’s recommendation is that both principals and teachers receive trainings
on the fundamental what, why, and how to do DLI. Since Peyton did not create a DLI program,
78

they did not talk about the initial professional development that goes into creating a new DLI
program, rather about the initial professional development for those being onboarded:
We designed about 4 hours of onboarding that we pay potential new teachers, current
teachers, anybody who is new to this model, in the process of learning how to do this
right. Being a dual language teacher, you have to know how to do it. Right? It takes time.
It takes a lot of focus and takes a lot of support, especially if we want to do a dual
language program, that's really intentional. So, we do an onboarding process. We sort of
treat it like a teacher credentialing program. We try to do that in-house.
Peyton was the only principal to put a number to the amount of time that the initial professional
development might require. Peyton was likely able to implement the professional development
“in-house” due to their previous experience in DLI as a DLI district coordinator and already
assuming leadership of an already established DLI program. Without those factors in place,
performing the professional development “in-house” would not be plausible.
Bilingual teaching certification. Within the realm of initial or prior professional
development, the training involved in attaining a bilingual teaching certification also is an
important organizational influence for the successful implementation of DLI. Four teachers and
two principals brought up the benefits of receiving the training required for the Bilingual, Cross-
cultural, Language and Academic Development (BCLAD) certification. Angel relayed an
experience they had during a class in their BCLAD program:
They actually had a teacher come in and teach us in a language that we didn't know. So
we were all Spanish speakers, but they had the teacher come in and teach a lesson in a
different language. She taught it in French, but imagine if it was taught in Chinese, but if
79

you have the right strategies, we all came out in the classroom without knowing the
language, understanding what they were trying to teach.
This class allowed Angel to recall their initial experiences learning a second language and
experience the immersion setting from the viewpoint of the learner instead of just focusing on
how to be a better teacher. Although they had this experience more than twenty years previously,
it still impacted the way they thought about immersion teaching. Channing brought up that “you
have to have BCLAD” in order to be hired into a DLI position in California. Dani added that
“BCLAD’s are tough” referring to the scarcity of those endorsed and implying that the
certification process is rigorous.
Ongoing Professional Development for Principals and Teachers. Current literature
indicates that ongoing professional development is an important organizational factor for both
principals and teachers in addition to the initial professional development to establish a DLI
program (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008; Menken & Solorza, 2014; Rocque et al., 2016). Much of
the professional development that the principals addressed was concerning the initial
professional development needed to create a DLI program, but they did make reference to some
aspects of ongoing professional development. The teachers were the most illuminating on this
topic as they shared about how they experienced ongoing professional development. At LLA, the
principal held weekly meetings where select teachers were chosen to share out about best
practices in instruction. Dani mentioned that the principal even hired a bilingual language
researcher, “who’s super popular on TikTok and Instagram,” to come periodically to their
weekly meetings to train the principal and teachers. Jessie shared, “[They go] through the
different principles of dual language and try to connect it to that cultural competence and equity,
voicing your opinions and thoughts on social issues and giving students that voice in both
80

languages.” The bilingual language researcher also shared about translanguaging, which they
referred to as “cross-linguistic connections.”
Jamie and Angel both explained that there were yearly conferences on dual language
instruction that were available for the teachers to attend to improve their practice. Rene shared
that the county office “offers something every year, and the teachers go on spring break. It's like
a three-day [academy], I believe. Two or three day academy that teachers go to.” For Channing,
it is important to get all teachers to at least the same base level of effective instruction and “that’s
when the PD comes in, that's when the continuous practice comes in.” Channing describes the
difficulty in choosing professional development that will improve the quality of instruction the
way that they want it to. While there is a lot of professional development required on the front
end of creating a DLI program, ongoing professional development is essential as you bring in
and develop new staff as well as keep both principals and teachers up to date with current
research proven practices to support students in DLI.
Summary of Organizational Factors
The perceptions of the principals and teachers regarding the organizational factors for
implementing and sustaining a DLI program indicated four important influences: student
recruitment; teacher recruitment; effective bilingual teachers; progress monitoring of academic
achievement and Spanish language; and initial and ongoing professional development for
principals and teachers. Student recruitment involves taking every event and opportunity to
showcase the DLI program, but as the program grows, the success and word of mouth are the
most important student recruitment tools. Teacher recruitment requires setting appropriate
minimum requirements including bilingual certification like the BCLAD and then creating
partnerships with institutions of higher learning to create a pipeline for future teacher
81

placements. Effective bilingual teachers provide equivalent instructional rigor in both languages
and utilize as much time as they can for preparation, planning, and collaboration. Progress
monitoring of academic achievement and the Spanish language requires periodic assessment and
reflection on the data gathered to make important decisions regarding instructional design and
next steps. For the success of a DLI program, teachers need to obtain a BCLAD endorsement and
receive initial professional development. From there the ongoing professional development for
principals and teachers is important to keep current with new research regarding best practices in
DLI instructional methods and strategies.

82

Chapter Five: Discussion
This chapter presents the findings and recommendations based upon this research study.
The problem of practice was Latinx mathematics performance specifically for ELs and the lack
of improving their educational outcomes at both a state and national level. The purpose of this
study was to explore the perceptions of principals and teachers of two high performing DLI
programs where all students including Latinx ELs were performing at or above grade level in
mathematics. Using the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model as a theoretical framework for this
study, participants were questioned in order to determine their perceptions of what knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors and influences were needed in order to implement and
sustain a DLI program. Purposeful sampling was used to recruit the four principals and six
teachers who were interviewed in the study. This chapter has been organized to present the
following information: summary of findings; implications for practice (recommendations); future
research; and conclusions.
Summary of Findings
Three research questions guided this study with the first question examining the
perception of principals and teachers regarding the knowledge factors and influences related to
implementing and sustaining a DLI program. The second question was regarding the
motivational factors and influences related to the implementation of a DLI program. The third
question was regarding the organizational factors and influences related to the implementation of
a DLI program. Findings have been organized by knowledge, motivation, and organizational
sections, along with a section about the limitations and delimitations of the study.
Knowledge Findings
83

All but one participant shared about the absolute importance of knowing how to identify,
select, and utilize a quality DLI curriculum. The principal selecting the curriculum needs to
consider the alignment to standards, the resources included, and the linguistic authenticity. While
teacher input is considered and included, the school or district administrator ends up being the
ultimate decision maker over curriculum selection. Rocque et al. (2016) indicated that principals
ought to be DLI gurus and therefore have an extensive knowledge of DLI curriculum. The
principals of the study seemed to concur with the research in that they all spoke with confidence
about not only what curriculum should contain, but of its importance to DLI programmatic
success.
Curriculum may include or reference effective instructional strategies to use to
disseminate content. Teachers’ knowledge of effective instructional strategies was of utmost
importance to the success of a DLI program. Utilizing immersion with complete fidelity, TPR,
realia, and discourse were noted as key strategies to implement in DLI classroom instruction. In
order to increase the knowledge and skill of teachers to be able to implement these effective
instructional strategies, professional development is also discussed in the organizational findings.
All 10 respondents demonstrated that they understood the impact of language proficiency
on academic achievement. The principals and teachers cited their own data achieved by their
students to make the case about how academic achievement increases with the improvement of
language proficiency. They also noted, as did the literature review (Lleras-Muney & Shertzer,
2015; Tazi, 2014), that initially students may not achieve as high as their peers academically in
the first few years in elementary, but from fourth grade on, DLI students would perform as high
if not higher than their peers academically with the added benefit of bilingualism and biliteracy
attained.
84

Motivation Findings
All principals and teachers discussed components of shared vision from both the staff and
parent standpoints. DeMatthews and Izquierdo (2018) noted the importance of the principal in
supporting DLI through the creation of a shared vision that requires buy-in from both staff and
parents, which buy-in is a vital motivational component for the success of a DLI program. The
four principals recognized that although they had significantly more experience and
qualifications to design the vision of the DLI program, they should not do it without the input of
their staff or parents in the community. In order to attain staff buy-in, much of what needed to be
done was to recruit staff members that were bilingually certified and already interested in the
current vision of the school. For parents, it was noted by all the principals and teachers that there
needed to be opportunities for large gatherings to inform parents about the benefits of DLI and
how it works, and at other times to simply solicit feedback and answer questions.
The principals demonstrated in their answers that they were strong advocates for
bilingualism and DLI. Alanis and Rodriguez (2008) indicated that the principal’s commitment to
bilingualism is critically important for a successful DLI program. The principal’s commitment to
bilingualism was mirrored in all the teachers that were interviewed as well. Literature agrees
with the principal’s commitment to bilingualism having a strong motivational impact on the
staff, parents, and students (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008; McNeal, 2015).
Organizational Findings
A fundamental organizational factor of the implementation of a DLI program is the
recruitment of both students and teachers. Rocque et al. (2016) described one of the duties of the
principal as being a DLI overseer, whose foremost responsibility is recruiting students and
teachers. Through the interviews, the participants stressed the importance of creating events and
85

opportunities to meet with parents to initially recruit students to DLI. The recruitment of students
in subsequent years was mostly done through word of mouth as parents and students were able to
share firsthand positive experiences to others. Social media was also shared as a necessary tool to
recruit and advertise continuing events that prospective parents could come to attend. For the
recruitment of teachers, setting minimum requirements of bilingual education certification with
experience preferred can be a good starting point. It is also important for the principal to make
connections throughout their school system or district and local higher education agencies where
they can have the opportunity to directly meet and actively recruit highly qualified teachers.
The principals and teachers stressed the importance of professional development
especially in order to establish a DLI program and to onboard new teachers. Some of that initial
professional development could come through the courses and trainings required to receive a
bilingual education certification. The literature highlighted the important role that principals play
in designing or providing professional development for teachers (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008;
DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2018). The principals spoke about onboarding their new teachers and
the initial training. Principals also spoke about how either they trained or arranged for an expert
to continue providing professional development opportunities for their teachers on current best
practices in DLI education.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations are the variables that the researcher cannot control and may affect the study’s
credibility (Creswell, 2014). Methodologically, the study is limited by the relatively small
population of two schools out of the many schools with successful DLI programs in California.
The responses from the participants are limited due to the following factors: trustworthiness;
experience working with the EL population; knowledge of or experience with language
86

instruction; and knowledge of or experience with EL interventions. Further limitations include:
the number of people who responded and were willing to participate in the study; participant
availability; and a limited data collection window.
Delimitations are the choices that describe the boundaries established for the study that
could affect the study’s validity (Creswell, 2014). General delimitations include: the total
number of conducted interviews; the interview protocol used by the researcher; and the use of
the KMO model. The data collected may be useful to learn how to implement and sustain a DLI
program in a school with similar demographics, but it will not necessarily be generalizable for
prospective principals and teachers to implement at any school. A larger and more
comprehensive study would have included additional schools that implemented other models of
DLI such as the 50-50 model and not only the 90-10. Therefore, the results do not suggest that
there is only one way or model to implement a successful DLI program that benefits both EP and
EL students.
Implications for Practice
The findings from this study suggested implications for practice, or recommendations, for
the implementation of a DLI program. It was noteworthy that many of the findings and potential
practices suggested by interviewees were not different from many of the practices often
described in schools such as curriculum selection, hiring, and the need for training and
professional development. Nevertheless, this section attempts to offer implications specifically
related to the design and implementation of DLI programs. Recommendations resulted from the
knowledge and motivation factors of principals and teachers, along with the organizational
features and structures that supported them in the implementation of their DLI programs.
87

Therefore, this section was organized by knowledge, motivation, and organizational
recommendations as derived from the Clark and Estes (2008) KMO model.
Knowledge Recommendations
The literature review and conceptual framework for this study emphasized the knowledge
that principals and teachers need to implement a successful DLI program. The two main
influences were the knowledge of curriculum and associated effective instructional strategies and
the knowledge of the impact of language proficiency on academic achievement. These
knowledge influences directly related to the knowledge recommendations presented in this
section.
Become Familiar with DLI Curriculum Available and the Associated Instructional Strategies
DLI curriculum can range from simply being a direct translation to Spanish of a
popularly used curriculum in English with a great deal of resources to a linguistically authentic
curriculum with limited resources. Principals will ultimately be required to select the curriculum
that will be used to guide the instruction in the school (Rocque et al., 2016). It is beneficial for
principals to review multiple DLI curriculums and to include their teachers in the review process
which could include piloting the curriculum given sufficient time and resources. Upon
examination of the curriculum, the principals and teachers should review the curriculum’s
suggested instructional methods, which should include complete Spanish immersion, TPR,
realia, and discourse activities for best results. After becoming familiar with available DLI
curriculum and the associated instructional strategies, principals will have the knowledge to
make an informed decision as to which curriculum will not only provide standards alignment,
but also include previously mentioned effective instructional strategies.
88

Principals need to begin the review of curriculum as one of the first steps in the
implementation of a DLI program around the same time as the initial development of the shared
vision, which is about one to two years prior to DLI program implementation. Alanis and
Rodriguez (2008) suggested that while curriculum selection is important, it is even more
fundamental to the success of a DLI program that principals become well-versed in the
curriculum that is selected. Principals will then be able to fulfill the role of instructional leader
(DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2018) as they lead their staff in preparing lessons from the
curriculum and delivering the instruction to the students. It is recommended that principals
allocate time to review the curriculum and to include teachers in the process which crosses over
into the motivation factors as well by giving teachers an opportunity to become invested in the
development of the shared vision which includes curriculum.
Provide Training on the Impact of Language Proficiency on Academic Achievement
All of the principals and teachers referred to the substantial impact that proficiency in
both languages has on academic achievement. The literature review highlighted multiple studies
that identified English language proficiency as a strong predictor of mathematics achievement
(Ardasheva et al., 2012; Carnoy & Garcia, 2017; Henry et al., 2014) and also that improved
proficiency in both languages improved academic achievement even more (Christian, 2016;
Lindholm-Leary & Hernandez, 2011; Marian et al., 2013). All the principals and teachers
consistently suggested that people need to be shown the data and research. While showing data
and research is not necessarily enough, it does suggest the need for principals and teachers to
initially receive training specifically on how language proficiency impacts academic
achievement. The training could include an overview of the literature review from this study that
shares the strong connection between language proficiency and academic achievement. To
89

disseminate the information, Schraw and McCrudden (2006) recommend the principles of
information processing theory that emphasize the need for learners to interact with the newly
obtained information to add meaning and facilitate transfer into long-term memory. Meaning can
be added to new knowledge or information through social interaction (Vygotsky, 1978). As
principals and teachers are trained on the impact of language proficiency on academic
achievement, they need to have opportunities to discuss the information with their colleagues.
Throughout the training, the trainer can set a timer, pose an open-ended question, and allow for
the participants to actively process the information (Mayer, 2011).
When implementing training, it is beneficial to prepare to evaluate transfer and decide the
time and location of the training (Grossman & Salas, 2011). Grossman and Salas (2011) explain
that transfer refers to work-related changes that come from the new knowledge obtained from
training. Clark and Estes (2008) provided guidance on how to ensure specific knowledge has
successfully been transferred to employees. Principals and teachers also need time to self-reflect
on their assumptions as well as the implications of the training on their day-to-day practice
(Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). This self-reflection can be planned into the end of the training or
revisited in subsequent regular recurring meetings at the school site. The use of post-training
surveys could be implemented to measure the principal or teacher’s perception and
understanding of how the knowledge applies to the implementation of a successful DLI program.
The timing of this training should occur prior to DLI program implementation in a space large
enough to have the entire teaching staff involved.
Motivation Recommendation
As with knowledge recommendations, motivation recommendations were also derived
from this study. The literature review and conceptual framework for this study emphasized the
90

motivational influences that principals and teachers need to implement a successful DLI
program. The main motivational influence was the creation and implementation of a shared
vision. This motivational influence directly related to the motivational recommendation
presented in this section.
Solicit Staff and Parent Input to Design Shared Vision
Designing a shared vision requires input from both staff and parents and is not just a
vision that the principal creates and shares out with staff and parents. The teachers expressed the
empowerment that they felt being able to contribute to the school vision of DLI. Rocque et al.
(2016) shared that as principals include all stakeholders, their sense of belonging increases
within the school culture and DLI program. As indicated by the principals interviewed,
principals should solicit input from the staff at each stage of the development of the shared vision
from the development of the mission and goals to the selection of curriculum and instructional
strategies that will aid in the accomplishment of the vision. Principals should also solicit input
from parents to know what they feel about DLI and what they hope the program provides for
their children so that they are both heard, and the principals are able to align their vision with
that of the parent stakeholder group.
The creation of the shared vision may begin with any stakeholder group as was evidenced
with both the implementation of the DLI programs at LLA and BA. With LLA, the parents
brought their ideas and requests for a DLI program to be created in their school district; in
contrast to BA, where the founding principal brought the idea of DLI to their school district
leadership. Regardless of the stakeholder group that initiates the interest and vision, DeMatthews
and Izquierdo (2018) have noted that the principal must take the lead in the facilitation of the
creation of the shared vision. This is the first step in the implementation of a DLI program and
91

should begin as early as one to two years prior to the implementation of the DLI program
according to the founding principals.
Organizational Recommendations
The literature review section and conceptual framework for this study emphasized the
organizational influences that principals and teachers need to implement a successful DLI
program. The organizational influences were the recruitment of students and the initial and
ongoing professional development. These organizational influences directly related to the
organizational recommendations presented in this section.
Create Community Events to Initially Recruit Students
The literature stressed the importance of the role of the principal in recruiting students
and provided some generic suggestions (Alanis & Rodriguez, 2008; DeMatthews & Izquierdo,
2018; Menken, 2014; Rocque et al., 2016); however, the specific ways to recruit students came
recommended through the interviews. Principals should set up large gatherings for parents to be
instructed on the benefits of DLI and could opt to invite an expert to keynote the presentation.
Principals should also consider setting up cultural events where students can sing, dance, or
otherwise perform to share both the language and culture that they are learning as a means to
attract parents to further look into the DLI program.
It is recommended that principals begin the large gatherings for instruction on the
benefits of DLI during the school year prior to the implementation of the DLI program so that
there is time to create interest in the parent stakeholder group. In the interviews, it was
mentioned that a local university professor was invited to share the neurological benefits of
developing bilingualism at a young age. Principals can reach out to experts at their local
universities to potentially recruit a keynote speaker to instruct parents about the benefits of DLI
92

especially if they lack knowledge or expertise about DLI. Since not every parent may be able to
make the first meeting, it is recommended that principals provide tangible resources that may be
distributed during the meeting. Those resources may include a recap of the cognitive and
academic benefits of bilingualism and DLI for students and how DLI looks in a classroom. These
materials may end up being shareable to other parents as the principals and teachers interviewed
shared that word of mouth ended up being one of the biggest recruitment techniques.
Provide Initial and Ongoing Professional Development for Principals and Teachers
Principals need to be instructional leaders for their staff therefore they should receive
specific professional development including how to support, train, and lead teachers in DLI
programs (Rocque et al., 2016). That training should also include helping the principals be able
to identify and avoid potential pitfalls that teachers may experience in the implementation of DLI
(DeMatthews & Izquierdo, 2018). Principals will need to continue to receive professional
development over time to remain current with updated DLI curriculum and instructional
practices. Apart from principals hiring teachers that have bilingual certification, principals
should also provide initial onboarding training so that teachers can become familiar with the
school’s vision, curriculum, and effective instructional practices to be used. With regards to
ongoing professional development, principals should provide training to teachers about DLI best
practices as they become aware through their trainings or to hire an expert that can provide that
level of support and training for them.
For the initial professional development prior to implementation, the principal may seek
out both regional support and/or well-known experts in the field of DLI. While the regional
supports did not exist when LLA established their DLI program, all principals referred to their
current county office of education that specifically had a department dedicated to offering
93

professional development and support for the implementation and expansion of DLI. This
specific county of education provided the training free to districts within their county, but they
did also allow for those in schools/districts in other counties to receive the same training and
support at a cost. It is recommended that all principals without extensive experience and training
in DLI seek the aid of this type of regional support even at a cost in order to receive the
professional development necessary to conduct the initial training for their own teachers.
For ongoing professional development, it is recommended that the principal seek out
conferences, current literature, and expert trainers that can help them stay current with best
practices in DLI instruction. Principals have the ultimate responsibility to ensure that their
teachers remain updated with current research proven to be effective in the implementation of
DLI (Rocque et al., 2016). While the responsibility lies with the principal, the principal does not
have to be the trainer themself. The interviewees shared about how they had partnered with a
current expert in DLI that provided multiple professional development sessions throughout the
school year. It is recommended that principals ensure the ongoing professional development by
either leading the training themselves or hiring an expert to do so.
Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) suggest that providing opportunities for people to process
and practice aids them with the internalization of new information. This time to process and
practice can come in the form of consistent and ongoing professional development specifically
targeted on effective DLI teaching practices. Through targeted practice and integration, teachers
can learn when to apply what they learn and better develop mastery of professional development
content (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). As teachers successfully develop mastery of DLI
teaching practices, their belief in their own ability and self-efficacy will increase (Bandura,
2012). Additionally, teachers who have successful experiences in practice will be more likely to
94

have more success in the application of successful practice (Van de Rijt et al., 2014). Thus, it is
recommended to integrate practice into the planned professional developments.
Future Research
This study included two DLI schools that implemented a 90-10 model, but another
prevalent model is the 50-50 model. Research detailed in the literature review demonstrated that
academic achievement was high in both models; however, further research could include a
comparison of the two models to determine if there is any difference in the Spanish language
proficiency level achieved by students, time until EL students achieve EP status, or achievement
levels in any specific academic subject. This study also focused on the two-way component of
DLI which includes students of both native languages; however, for some DLI programs, there is
only the demographic available for one-way immersion where no students natively speak the
target language, and the peer modeling aspect is removed. Future research could determine if
one-way immersion is as impactful academically and in mastering a language as the two-way
DLI programs. Further inquiry could be done as a case study for a school that follows the
recommendations of this study to both determine whether the recommendations were indeed
useful and to add onto them.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to determine the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors related to the implementation of a DLI program. This is relevant because
Spanish-English DLI is a promising strategy that is demonstrating remarkable results in the
improving mathematics scores of Latinx students especially Latinx ELs that have historically
been the lowest-achieving demographic of students on both national mathematics assessments as
well as in the state of Nevada. Nevada is a state that has only three programs and none in the
95

southern half of the state where the majority of the Latinx EL population resides. With the
success of DLI in many locations and specifically in California at the schools that were selected
for this study, this research will hopefully provide a Nevada elementary school principal the why
and how to begin to implement and maintain a DLI program. The creation of one DLI program
in Southern Nevada and the subsequent success has the potential to spread throughout the state
benefitting ten of thousands of youths that otherwise may have been left behind academically. As
Latinx EL elementary students’ instruction and achievement improves, so will their likelihood of
future academic success and opportunities in society.

96

References
Alanís, I., & Rodríguez, M. (2008). Sustaining a Dual Language Immersion Program: Features
of Success. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(4), 305–319.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15348430802143378
Ardasheva, Y., Tretter, T., & Kinny, M. (2012). English Language Learners and Academic
Achievement: Revisiting the Threshold Hypothesis. Language Learning, 62(3), 769–812.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00652.x
Aquino-Sterling, C., & Rodríguez-Valls, F. (2016). Developing Teaching-Specific Spanish
Competencies in Bilingual Teacher Education: Toward a Culturally, Linguistically, and
Professionally Relevant Approach. Multicultural Perspectives, 18(2), 73–81.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15210960.2016.1152894
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1289828547/
Bandura, A. (2012). On the Functional Properties of Perceived Self-Efficacy Revisited. Journal
of Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Barton, P., & Coley, R. J. (2009). Parsing the achievement gap II: Baselines for tracking
progress. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
Beal, C., Adams, N., & Cohen, P. (2010). Reading Proficiency and Mathematics Problem
Solving by High School English Language Learners. Urban Education, 45(1), 58–74.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085909352143
Bialystok, E. (2018). Bilingual education for young children: review of the effects and
consequences. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 21(6), 666
679. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1203859
97

Brown, G. (1980). The condition of education for Hispanic Americans. Washington]: U.S. Dept.
of Health, Education, and Welfare, Education Division, National Center for Education
Statistics.
Butler, N., Bynner, J., & University of London, I. (2015). 1970 British Cohort Study: Ten-Year
Follow-Up, 1980 [Data set]. UK Data Service.
https://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-3723-7
Campbell, J., Voelkl, K., & Donahue, P. (1998). Report in brief : NAEP 1996 trends in academic
progress (Revised.). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational
Research and Improvement.
Carnoy, M., & Garcia, E. (2017). Five Key Trends in U.S. Student Performance. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1958456789/
Center for Applied Linguistics (2020). Resources for Two-Way Immersion and Dual Language
Practitioners.
Christian, D. (2016). Dual Language Education: Current Research Perspectives. International
Multilingual Research Journal: Dual Language Education: Current Research
Perspectives, 10(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2016.1118666
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. IAP.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: bilingual children in the crossfire.
Clevedon [England]: Multilingual Matters.
Cummins, J., & Hornberger, N. (2008). BICS and CALP: Empirical and Theoretical Status of the
Distinction. In Encyclopedia of Language and Education (pp. 487–499).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_36
98

Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher
Education, 51(3), 166–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487100051003002
DeMatthews, D., & Izquierdo, E. (2018). The Importance of Principals Supporting Dual
Language Education: A Social Justice Leadership Framework. Journal of Latinos and
Education, 17(1), 53–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348431.2017.1282365
Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). Washington, D.C.]: U.S. Government Publishing Office.
Fry, R., & Gonzales, F. (2008). One-in-Five and Growing Fast: A Profile of Hispanic Public
School Students. Pew Hispanic Center. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/1820772709/
Ford, D. (2015). Multicultural Issues: Recruiting and Retaining Black and Latinx Students in
Gifted Education: Equality Versus Equity Schools. Gifted Child Today, 38(3), 187–191.
doi:10.1177/1076217515583745
Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2018). Student absenteeism: Who misses school and how missing
school matters for performance. In Policy File. Economic Policy Institute.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: an introduction (4
th
ed.). Longman.
Gottfried, M. (2014). Chronic Absenteeism and Its Effects on Students’ Academic and
Socioemotional Outcomes. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR),
19(2), 53–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2014.962696
Gottfried, M., & Kirksey, J. (2017). “When” Students Miss School: The Role of Timing of
Absenteeism on Students’ Test Performance. Educational Researcher, 46(3), 119–130.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x17703945
Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). UNDERSTANDING, SELECTING, AND INTEGRATING A
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK IN DISSERTATION RESEARCH: CREATING THE
99

BLUEPRINT FOR YOUR “HOUSE.” Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice
and Research. https://doi.org/10.5929/2014.4.2.9
Henderson, K., & Palmer, D. (2015). Teacher and Student Language Practices and Ideologies in
a Third-Grade Two-Way Dual Language Program Implementation. International
Multilingual Research Journal, 9(2), 75–92.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2015.1016827
Henry, D., Baltes, B., & Nistor, N. (2014). Examining the Relationship Between Math Scores
and English Language Proficiency. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 4(1),
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1842488659/
Huang, F., Invernizzi, M., & Drake, E. (2012). The differential effects of preschool: Evidence
from Virginia. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(1), 33–45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.03.006
Joensen, J., & Nielsen, H. (2009). Is There a Causal Effect of High School Math on Labor
Market Outcomes? Journal of Human Resources, 44(1), 171–198.
Jung, E., & Zhang, Y. (2016). Parental involvement, children’s aspirations, and achievement in
new immigrant families. The Journal of Educational Research, 109(4), 333–350.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.959112
Kieffer, M., Lesaux, N., Rivera, M., & Francis, D. (2009). Accommodations for English
Language Learners Taking Large-Scale Assessments: A Meta-Analysis on Effectiveness
and Validity. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1168–1201.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309332490
Koedel, C., & Tyhurst, E. (2012). Math Skills and Labor-Market Outcomes: Evidence from a
Resume-Based Field Experiment. Economics of Education Review, 31(1), 131–140.
100

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.09.006
Leavitt, R., & Hess, R. (2017). School Climate and the Latino-White Achievement Gap.
Leadership and Policy in Schools, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2017.1384498
LeFevre, A., & Shaw, T. (2012). Latino Parent Involvement and School Success: Longitudinal
Effects of Formal and Informal Support. Education and Urban Society, 44(6), 707–723.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124511406719
Li, J., Steele, J., Slater, R., Bacon, M., & Miller, T. (2016). Teaching Practices and Language
Use in Two-Way Dual Language Immersion Programs in a Large Public School District.
International Multilingual Research Journal: Dual Language Education: Current
Research Perspectives, 10(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2016.1118669
Lindholm-Leary, K., & Block, N. (2010). Achievement in predominantly low SES/Hispanic dual
language schools. International Journal Of Bilingual Education And Bilingualism, 13(1),
43–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050902777546
Lindholm-Leary, K., & Hernandez, A. (2011). Achievement and language proficiency of Latino
students in dual language programmes: native English speakers, fluent English/previous
ELLs, and current ELLs. Journal Of Multilingual And Multicultural Development, 32(6),
531–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2011.611596
Lleras-Muney, A., & Shertzer, A. (2015). Did the Americanization Movement Succeed? An
Evaluation of the Effect of English-Only and Compulsory Schooling Laws on
Immigrants. American Economic Journal. Economic Policy, 7(3), 258–290.
https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20120219
Madrid, E. (2011). The Latino Achievement Gap. Multicultural Education, 18(3), 7–12.
Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/926978300/
101

Marian, V., Shook, A., & Schroeder, S. (2013). Bilingual Two-Way Immersion Programs
Benefit Academic Achievement. Bilingual Research Journal, 36(2), 167–186.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2013.818075
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA:Sage.
Mayer, R. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McCormick, M., Cappella, E., O'Connor, E., & McClowry, S. (2013). Parent Involvement,
Emotional Support, and Behavior Problems: An Ecological Approach. The Elementary
School Journal, 114(2), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1086/673200
McNeal Jr, R. (2015). Parent involvement and student performance: the influence of school
context. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 14(2), 153–167.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-014-9167-7
Méndez, L., Hammer, C., Lopez, L., & Blair, C. (2019). Examining language and early
numeracy skills in young Latino dual language learners. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 46, 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.02.004
Menken, K., & Solorza, C. (2014). Principals as linchpins in bilingual education: the need for
prepared school leaders. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism.,
18(6), 676–697. https://doi.org/info:doi/
Menken, K., & Sánchez, M. (2019). Translanguaging in English‐Only Schools: From Pedagogy
to Stance in the Disruption of Monolingual Policies and Practices. TESOL Quarterly,
53(3), 741–767. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.513
Merriam, S., & Tisdell, E. (2016). Qualitative research : a guide to design and implementation
(Fourth edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley Brand.
102

Murayama, K., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., & Vom Hofe, R. (2013). Predicting Long-Term
Growth in Students’ Mathematics Achievement: The Unique Contributions of Motivation
and Cognitive Strategies. Child Development, 84(4), 1475–1490.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12036
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). National Mathematics Advisory Panel. US
Department of Education.
National Center for Education Statistics (2017). Graduation rate from first institution attended
for first-time, full-time bachelor's degree- seeking students at 4-year
postsecondary
institutions, by race/ethnicity, time to completion, sex, control of institution, and
acceptance rate: Selected cohort entry years, 1996 through 2010. Digest of
Education
Statistics. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_326.10.asp?current=yes
National Center for Education Statistics. (2018). Average National Assessment of Educational
Progress (NAEP) mathematics scale score, by sex, race/ethnicity, and grade: Selected
years, 1990 through 2017. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/
National Center for Education Statistics (2019). College Enrollment Rates. Condition of
Education 2019. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_cpb.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). English Language Learners in Public Schools.
Condition of Education 2019. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp
National Center for Education Statistics (2020). Preschool and Kindergarten Enrollment.
103

Condition of Education 2020. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cfa.asp
National Center for Education Statistics (2020). Concentration of Public School Students
Eligible for Free or Reduced-Price Lunch. Condition of Education. Retrieved from
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_clb.pdf
Nation’s Report Card. (2020). National Assessment of Educational Progress - NAEP.
Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/
Nevada Department of Education. (2019). Enrollment for Nevada Public Schools. Retrieved
from http://www.doe.nv.gov/DataCenter/Enrollment/
Nevada Report Card. (2020). Retrieved from http://nevadareportcard.nv.gov/
Nguyen, T., Watts, T., Duncan, G., Clements, D., Sarama, J., Wolfe, C., & Spitler, M. (2016).
Which preschool mathematics competencies are most predictive of fifth grade
achievement? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 550–560.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.02.003
Pacific Policy Research Center. (2010). Successful Bilingual and Immersion Education
Models/Programs. Honolulu: Kamehameha Schools, Research & Evaluation Division.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design:
Recent Developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.
https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Ramirez, M. (2016). Dual-Language Learning Programs on the Rise. The Education Digest,
81(8), 26–31.
Rathee, N. (2017). Relooking at the common core standards through the lens of equity—closing
104

the achievement gap. (Report). European Scientific Journal, 13(22).
https://doi.org/10.19044/esi.2017.v13n22p1
Reardon, S., & Galindo, C. (2009). The Hispanic-White Achievement Gap in Math and Reading
in the Elementary Grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46(3), 853–891.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209333184
Restrepo, M., Castilla, A., Schwanenflugel, P., Neuharth-Pritchett, S., Hamilton, C., & Arboleda,
A. (2010). Effects of a Supplemental Spanish Oral Language Program on Sentence
Length, Complexity, and Grammaticality in Spanish-Speaking Children Attending
English-Only Preschools. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 41(1), 3–13.
https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2009/06-0017)
Reynolds, A., Temple, J., Ou, S., Arteaga, I., & White, B. (2011). School-Based Early Childhood
Education and Age-28 Well-Being: Effects by Timing, Dosage, and Subgroups. Science
(American Association for the Advancement of Science), 333(6040), 360–364.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1203618
Rocque, R., Ferrin, S., Hite, J., & Randall, V. (2016). The Unique Skills and Traits of Principals
in One‐Way and Two‐Way Dual Immersion Schools. Foreign Language Annals, 49(4),
801–818. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.12238
Ross, T., Kena, G., Rathbun, A., Kewal, Ramani, A., Zhang, J., Kristapovich, P., and Manning,
E. (2012). Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study. U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office.
Sass, T., Hannaway, J., Xu, Z., Figlio, D., & Li, F. (2012). Value added of teachers in
high-poverty schools and lower poverty schools. Journal of Urban Economics, 72(2),
105

104–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2012.04.004
Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. (2006). Information processing theory.
http://www.education.com/reference/article/information-processing-theory/
Seifert, T. (2004). Understanding student motivation. Educational Research, 46(2), 137–149.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188042000222421
Serrano, S. (2019). A Decade Into Spanish Immersion In Washoe Schools. Retrieved from
https://www.kunr.org/post/decade-spanish-immersion-washoe-schools#stream/0
Siegler, R., Duncan, G., Davis-Kean, P., Duckworth, K., Claessens, A., Engel, M., Susperreguy,
M, Chen, M. (2012). Early Predictors of High School Mathematics Achievement.
Psychological Science, 23(7), 691–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612440101
Sonnenschein, S., & Galindo, C. (2015). Race/Ethnicity and Early Mathematics Skills: Relations
Between Home, Classroom, and Mathematics Achievement. The Journal of Educational
Research, 108(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.880394
Stansfield, C., Deville, C., & Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2011). Oral translation as a test
accommodation for ELLs. Language Testing, 28(3), 401–416.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211404191
Steele, J., Slater, R., Zamarro, G., Miller, T., Li, J., Burkhauser, S., & Bacon, M. (2017). Effects
of Dual-Language Immersion Programs on Student Achievement: Evidence From Lottery
Data. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 282S–306S.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216634463
Tazi, Z. (2014). Ready for La Escuela: School Readiness and the Languages of Instruction in
Kindergarten. Journal of Multilingual Education Research, 5(1), 11-31.
Tracy, S. J. (2013). Qualitative research methods. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
106

Umansky, I., & Reardon, S. (2014). Reclassification Patterns Among Latino English Learner
Students in Bilingual, Dual Immersion, and English Immersion Classrooms. American
Educational Research Journal, 51(5), 879–912.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214545110
U.S. Department of Education (2015). Office of English Language Acquisition, Dual Language
Education Programs: Current State Policies and Practices, Retrieved from
https://ncela.ed.gov/files/rcd/TO20_DualLanguageRpt_508.pdf
US Department of Education. (2017). Our Nation's English Learners. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/datastory/el-characteristics/index.html
US Department of Education (2019). Chronic Absenteeism in the Nation’s Schools. Civil Rights
Data Collection. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/datastory/chronicabsenteeism.html#one
Van de Rijt, A., Kang, S., Restivo, M., & Patil, A. (2014). Field experiments of
success-breeds-success dynamics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America, 111(19), 6934–6939.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1316836111
Vasquez-Salgado, Y., Greenfield, P., & Burgos-Cienfuegos, R. (2015). Exploring Home-School
Value Conflicts: Implications for Academic Achievement and Well-Being Among Latino
First-Generation College Students. Journal of Adolescent Research, 30(3), 271–305.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558414561297
Vygotsky, L. 1978. Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Watts, T., Duncan, G., Clements, D., & Sarama, J. (2018). What Is the Long‐Run Impact of
Learning Mathematics During Preschool? Child Development, 89(2), 539–555.
107

https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12713
Watzinger-Tharp, J., Swenson, K., & Mayne, Z. (2018). Academic achievement of students in
dual language immersion. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
21(8), 913–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1214675
Weiss, R. S. (1994) Learning From Strangers: The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview
Studies. Free Press.

108

Appendix A: Interview Protocol
1. Tell me a little about your current role and educational background.
2. What is your experience with English Learners? (RQ 1; Knowledge)
3. What are your thoughts on bilingualism? How does it affect students and their academic
performance? (RQ 1; Knowledge)
4. What is your experience with dual language immersion? (RQ 1; Knowledge)
5. In your own words, can you tell me how dual language immersion programs work? What
does the implementation look like? What happens in the classroom? (RQ 1; Knowledge)
6. In your opinion, what are the benefits of dual language immersion? What about the
downsides - what are the consequences of a dual immersion program? (RQ 1 & 2;
Knowledge & Motivation)
7. What are the main steps and considerations to be taken by a school or district that wants
to implement a dual language immersion program? (RQ 1 & 3; Knowledge &
Organization)
8. What additional training or knowledge would they need to implement a dual language
immersion program? (RQ 1; Knowledge) (Potential probe for 7)
9. What additional resources would they need in order to implement a program? (RQ 3;
Organization) (2nd probe for 7)
10. How did you determine the curriculum to use to run a dual language immersion program?
(RQ 1; Knowledge)
11. How much professional development did you need in order to implement and maintain
your dual language immersion program? What kinds of professional development was
required? (RQ 1 & 3; Knowledge & Organization)
109

12. What are the challenges of implementing and maintaining a dual language immersion
program? (RQ 3; Organization)
13. How do you achieve staff and community buy-in to develop a shared vision? (RQ 2;
Motivation)
14. Walk me through how you recruit students into a dual language immersion program. (RQ
3; Organization)
15. What kind of staffing needs do you have implementing and maintaining a dual language
immersion program? How do you recruit teachers?
16. How do you monitor students in the dual language immersion program to determine
successful positive growth in both language and academics? (RQ 3; Organization)
17. Some people say that dual language immersion programs detract from the focus of
standardized assessments and could thereby negatively impact overall school outcomes,
what would you say to those people? (RQ 1; Knowledge)

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A case study on the planning and implementation of a dual language immersion program in a K-12 school district

PDF

Explicit instruction’s impact on the student achievement gap in K-12 English language learners

PDF

Preparing students for the global society: sustaining a dual language immersion program

PDF

Implementing Chinese-English dual language programs in international schools: a study for an international school in southeast Asia

PDF

Teach them to read: implementing high leverage pedagogical practices to increase English language learner academic achievement

PDF

Reducing suspensions through implementation of schoolwide PBIS

PDF

Multi-tiered system of supports to address significant disproportionality in special education

PDF

The impact of restructuring the language arts intervention program and its effect on the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Satisfactory academic progress for doctoral students: an improvement study

PDF

A case study of the roles of principals in dual language immersion programs

PDF

A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers’ perceptions and impact in their dual immersion classrooms

PDF

A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers' perceptions and impact in their dual language immersion classroom

PDF

Educational technology integration: a search for best practices

PDF

KMO factors influencing the culturally responsive implementation of PBIS: a mixed-methods study

PDF

Professional development in generating managerial high-quality feedback

PDF

The effect of a language arts intervention on the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

Building capacity in homeroom teachers to support English language learners

PDF

A culture of care in elementary schools to impact Black student academic achievement: a case study

PDF

School-based interventions for chronically absent students in poverty

PDF

Academic coaching for Pell-eligible, academically at-risk freshmen: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Fossett, David (author)

Core Title Implementation of dual language immersion to improve academic achievement of Latinx English learners

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 10/08/2021

Defense Date 09/03/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Academic Achievement,dual language immersion,English learners,Latinx students,Nevada,OAI-PMH Harvest,program implementation,Spanish

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Malloy, Courtney (committee chair), Muraszewski, Alison (committee member), Stowe, Kathy (committee member)

Creator Email fossett10@gmail.com,fossettd@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC16022639

Unique identifier UC16022639

Legacy Identifier etd-FossettDav-10151

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Fossett, David

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu