dissertation about bilingual education

• Advanced Search
• by Research Center
• by Document Type
• Users by Expertise
• Users by Department
• Users by Name
• Latest Additions

Information

• -->Main Page
• Getting Started
• Submitting Your ETD
• Repository Policies

Bilingual education policy in the United States public school system has a long-standing social and political history plagued by a forty-year debate about its goals and effectiveness. Policy has been informed by theory aimed at identifying best methods to provide English instruction to English Language Learners (ELLs), and research on bilingual education program effectiveness. However, perceptions about language based on cultural and political values have also played a considerable role, and fuel the national debate. On one side of this debate, critics argue bilingual education hinders ELLs’ ability to assimilate and rapidly acquire the dominant language of the US. Proponents of bilingual education, on the other hand, see it as an enrichment program, benefiting both ELLs and native English speakers cognitively and politically within an increasingly globalized context. This study examines the forces (second language acquisition theory in bilingual education, research on program effectiveness, the history of bilingual education policy-making, and the influence of language ideology) comprising bilingual education, with the outcome being twofold. The first is to dispel common misperceptions perpetuated within the debate about bilingual education by unearthing the multiplicities of it through qualitative reviews of each component lending itself to the phenomenon. Second, to illustrate how policy-making is encompassed by language ideologies as evidenced particularly within bilingual education policy shifts over the past forty-years. The reviews in this study are designed to provide policy-makers and educators with a comprehensive account of bilingual education to improve and inform decision making about its future. The findings of these analyses suggest ideologically founded policy have led to legislation lacking alignment with theory and research demonstrating evidence of bilingual education program effectiveness.

Available Versions of this Item

• Bilingual Education in the United States: An Analysis of the Convergence of Policy, Theory and Research. (deposited 11 Jan 2012 19:40) [Currently Displayed]

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Plum analytics, actions (login required).

This site is hosted by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program

The ULS Office of Scholarly Communication and Publishing fosters and supports new modes of publishing and information-sharing among researchers.

The University of Pittsburgh and D-Scholarship@Pitt support Open Access to research.

Connect with us

Send comments or questions.

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

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

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

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

1 Introduction

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

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

2 Literature review

2.1 defining ‘bilingual education’.

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

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

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

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

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

3 Methodology

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

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

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

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

3.1 Design research questions

How is bilingual education implemented in China?

What do Chinese teachers and learners think about bilingual education?

How is bilingual education in China evaluated in research?

3.2 Keywords identified for conducting the literature search

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

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

3.3 Literature search conducted

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

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

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

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

3.4 Evaluate literature using inclusion criteria

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

Inclusion criteria of the QRS.

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

3.5 Data extraction and synthesis

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

Analysis procedure of the 16 studies.

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

4 Findings and discussion

4.1 background information of the 16 studies.

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

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

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

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

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

4.2 Findings and discussion based on the research questions

4.2.1 rq1 – how is bilingual education implemented in china.

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

Types of bilingual education in 16 studies.

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

Sub-types of bilingual education.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Teachers’ perceptions towards bilingual education.

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

Learners’ perceptions towards bilingual education.

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

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

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

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

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

5 Conclusion

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

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

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

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

Acknowledgement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Supplementary Material

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

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

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

• X / Twitter

Supplementary Materials

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

• Service to the State

College of Education - UT Austin

• Academics Overview
• Bachelor’s Programs
• Master’s Programs
• Doctoral Programs
• Post-baccalaureate
• Educator Preparation Programs
• Student Life Overview
• Career Engagement
• For Families
• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Tuition, Financial Aid and Scholarships
• Commencement
• Office of Student Affairs
• Departments Overview
• Curriculum and Instruction
• Educational Leadership and Policy
• Kinesiology and Health Education
• Our Programs
• Educational Psychology
• Special Education
• Centers and Institutes
• Find Faculty
• Office of Educational Research
• Alumni and Friends Overview
• Advisory Council
• Meet Our Alumni
• Update Your Information
• About Overview
• College Leadership
• Facts and Rankings
• Reimagine Education
• Visit the college
• Building Renovations

How to Apply

• How To Apply
• Newly Admitted Students
• Academic Advising
• Student Services
• Office of Educational Research Support
• Communications, Marketing and Media
• Visit the College

Bilingual/Bicultural Education Doctoral Program

Bilingual/bicultural education.

Doctoral Program

Department of Curriculum and Instruction

The Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) is a research-oriented degree program designed for individuals who intend to work mainly in primary research in the fields of Bilingual/Bicultural Education, Language Policy and Education, or Biliteracy. This program prepares graduate students in research design and interpretation. Graduate student research contributes to knowledge of bilingual education theories, concepts and practice.

BBE Program alumni currently serve in roles such as college or university faculty members, researchers in federal and state government, and research consultants and directors of private foundations and non-profit organizations.

Studies long-term relationships with Latinx bilingual students and teachers using arts-based biliteracy approaches to affirm and amplify silenced perspectives, build connections, and develop bilingualism and biculturalism.

Develops and evaluates interventions and assessments using technology to support the academic success of Latinx students and other students whose home language is not English.

Focuses on language and cultural influences on teaching and learning mathematics, particularly equity issues involving Latinx students’ mathematical thinking, the simultaneous learning of English as a second language and math and preparing teachers ...

Examines the effects of state and federal policies on college access and completion outcomes for low-income and underrepresented populations including immigrant and English Learner students.

Examines ethnographic language and literacy practices in K-12 classrooms, specifically focusing on how Latinx critical race theory explains the relationship between heritage language and culture and the evolving identities of future teachers.

Interests also include critical race theory specifically Latinx critical race theory and multigenerational subtractive schooling experienced by a marginalized majority.

Examines the contributions of strengths-based approaches in literacy instruction with Spanish-speaking bilingual teacher candidates and in-service teachers in the U.S. and in Latin America. 

Prepares students to become educators in bilingual and ESL education and mentors novice bilingual educators.

Application Requirements

Applicants must provide a supplemental writing sample written in Spanish to be uploaded as a “Miscellaneous Admissions Document.” The writing sample should describe your cross-cultural and/or cross-linguistic experiences.  You also should demonstrate competency with the language and content of the essay and show that you have made efforts to cross borders by working, traveling, or otherwise have lived in situations that required a multiplicity of cultural competencies.

General C&I Requirements (Minimum 21 hours)

Foundation Requirements (9 hours required)

• EDC 380F  Sociocultural Foundations
• EDC 381F  Introduction to Teaching and Teacher Education
• EDC 383F  Curriculum Theory

Research Methodology Requirements (12 hours minimum)

To be taken in sequence:

• EDC 381R  Intro to Systems of Human Inquiry
• EDC 385R  Introduction To Quantitative Research ( may be taken concurrent with EDC 381R )
• EDC 386R  Introduction To Qualitative Research ( requires EDC 381R as a prerequisite )
• EDC 387R  Advanced Quantitative Research
• EDC 388R  Advanced Qualitative Research

Directed Research (Minimum 12 hours)

• EDC 396T*  Directed Research in Curriculum and Instruction (6 hours)

Note :  EDC 396T can be taken more than once for credit. 6 additional hours of coursework involving a substantial directed research component, This may include additional EDC 396Ts.

Specialization Requirements (Minimum 18 hours)

Students with an emphasis on Bilingual/Bicultural Education will take additional related courses, selected with the assistance and approval of the area program adviser. To help meet their personal goals, students are encouraged to select courses from other clusters in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction.

A. Required (12 hours): EDC 385G Second Language Acquisition EDC 385G Biliteracy and New Literacy Studies EDC 385G Language Policy and Education: Global Perspectives and Local Implications EDC 385G Immigration Theory in Education

B. Electives (6 hours): Students select courses, such as those listed below, according to individual interests and needs and in consultation with their advisor:

EDC 390T Foundations of Bilingual Education EDC 382E Critical Pedagogy in Bilingual Bicultural Education EDC 385G Evaluation of Language Education EDC 385G Biliteracy and Computer-Mediated Learning EDC 385G Dual Language Education: Current Trends and Issues EDC 385G Language Acquisition and Assessment for Multicultural Special Education EDC 385G Teaching Culture EDC 385G Language and Politics in Language Planning EDC 385G Literacy and Culture EDC 385G Social/Cultural/Political Context Language Learning

EDC 384P Equity/Pol/in Math/Sci/Tech Education EDC 385G Multicultural Curriculum and Teaching EDC 385G Cultural Knowledge of Teachers and Teaching EDC 385G Identity and Agency in Education EDC 385G Anthropology of Education

Courses Outside the Department (Minimum 6 hours)

Coursework from sections, General Requirements, Directed Research, and Special Requirements, may fulfill this requirement (thus hours in this section may already be counted as credit toward total hours).

Students are encouraged to seek out courses that relate to Bilingual/Bicultural Education and their own research interests in such areas as: Mexican American Studies, African American Studies, Asian Studies, Middle Eastern Studies; Communication, Comparative Literature, Cultural Studies, Early Childhood Education, Educational Administration, Educational Psychology, English Literature, Health Education, Latin American Studies, Law, IT/Technology, Linguistics, Language and Literacy, Spanish Literature, Science/Math Education, Social Work, Special Education, Women’s / Gender Studies.

Dissertation (Minimum 6 hours)

Students are required to continuously register for at least three credits of dissertation once they have  advanced to candidacy . 

You must register in X99W (399, 699 or 999W) in each semester of candidacy until you graduate.

Please Note:  Students receiving fellowships, assistantships, or other financial aid, may be required to take 9 hours of dissertation credit each semester.

Additional Resources

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Current Student Resources

At a Glance

Program Starts : Fall

Deadline to Apply : December 31

Credit Hours Required : 63

Schedule : Flexible

Program Location : On Campus

GRE Required? No

Program Area Coordinator, Advisor Maria Franquiz

Find out information about the admission process and application requirements.

Become a Longhorn

Start your ApplyTexas application today to take the next steps towards your future as a Longhorn.

Request Information

Let us know what your academic interests are within the College of Education and we’ll be in touch.

Curriculum and Instruction News

Discover the exciting research and work being done by faculty and students in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. 

Graduate Students

• All Graduate Programs
• Graduate Student FAQs
• Master’s Programs

• Request Info

COEHD professor wins Outstanding Dissertation award

• Home  /  News  /  2021  /  March  /  COEHD professor wins Outstanding Dissertation award

Posted on March 29, 2021 by Christopher Reichert

While 2020 was filled with unprecedented challenges, COEHD professor Zhongfeng Tian, Ph.D., remained dedicated to his education and career. While writing and defending his doctoral dissertation at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and beginning his new career at UTSA while still living in Boston, the new assistant professor of TESOL/applied linguistics has hit the ground running. His dissertation won second place as the AERA Bilingual Education Research SIG Outstanding Dissertation of the Year for 2021. Tian says he’s honored to win second place.

 “It’s finally like your work got recognized at a national level because this organization is one of the prestigious organizations in our field – it’s kind of a big thing,” Tian said. “It kind of affirms what you have done. For people who go through the dissertation process, it’s a long journey…it’s kind of like a marathon; you put in a lot of energy and a lot of time.”

And for Tian, the journey has been long, beginning in China where Tian received his bachelor’s degree and began working as an English and Mandarin teacher.

“English teaching has always been my passion,” he said. “I like working with students. I want to work with students from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds, from different age groups.”

Tian, who speaks Mandarin, English, and Cantonese, says he is especially passionate about creating multilingual environments for his students. This passion is partly what prompted him to study in the United States, which he says has been hugely influenced by a monolingual ideology.

“I see this deficit in these English-only classrooms existing in many classroom contexts,” he said. “So, I want to disrupt this ideology and create more multilingual spaces.”

To this end, Tian’s focus within his doctoral studies has been a concept called translanguaging.

“Simply speaking,” he said, “translanguaging is a pedagogy – an instructional strategy – that creates multilingual spaces where learners can bring their cultural and linguistic diversity into the classroom.”

“Translanguaging is a pedagogy – an instructional strategy – that creates multilingual spaces where learners can bring their cultural and linguistic diversity into the classroom.”

This instructional strategy forms the basis for Tian’s award-winning dissertation, titled “Translanguaging Design in a Mandarin/English Dual Language Bilingual Education Program: a Researcher-Teacher Collaboration.”

Tian says translanguaging offers a new philosophy of language teaching, in which the knowledge students already possess is viewed as a resource to be utilized and not an obstacle to be overcome. In this way, it differs fundamentally from the standard language immersion program, which requires students to speak, write, and think only in the target language.

“We think that when you learn a language you have to leave everything behind, just immerse yourself in the target language only…but that is not the reality,” Tian said. “We always learn new things based on what we already have. That is just the human learning process. So, translanguaging in that sense…is just a way back to the humanity, how we learn.”

One example of this is by exploring the similarities and differences between two languages. Anytime a student discovers a new cognate and realizes they already know its definition, Tian says they’re already engaged in translanguaging.

“When we learn a new language, we do translanguaging all the time,” he said. “It’s just sometimes teachers choose to ignore those or don’t recognize those as resources.”

Tian says that this inherent exploration of linguistic similarities has led many translanguaging scholars to explore Spanish-English bilingual programs, due to the similarities between those two languages. In contrast, he says there is very little research into Mandarin-English dual-language programs. Despite the perception that Mandarin and English may be too dissimilar to translanguage, Tian disagrees. For example, while the vocabulary and grammar may differ, English and Mandarin share basic word order and sentence structure. Exploring these differences, Tian says, proved helpful to the students he studied.

“Those were really helpful for students to tease out these different linguistic systems,” he said. “Even though they’re third graders…they’re already starting to develop this metalinguistic knowledge to say, ‘okay, in this way that’s how I say Chinese sentences. In that way, that’s how English sentences are being used.’”

Tian believes that such techniques, which he calls crosslinguistic analysis, can serve as a bridge to connect to languages, regardless of surface dissimilarity.

“How you decode a text, how you write a paragraph, those strategies can be transferred,” he said.

However, despite the promise shown by his dissertation, Tian is careful not to overstate his results. Due to the qualitative structure of his research, his focus was not on measuring a change in the students’ language proficiency, but rather on the process that students used.

“I want to make sure to be cautious,” he said. “I don’t want to overgeneralize or overpromise the promise of translanguaging pedagogies, to say to people, ‘this is so wonderful, there’s no drawbacks or challenges.’”

Tian hopes that in the future he will be able to continue his research and quantitatively measure how much translanguaging benefits students. In the meantime, thanks to the abundance of Spanish-English dual language immersion programs in the San Antonio area, Tian is already beginning a new project with Kathryn Henderson Ph.D., an associate professor in the Department of Bicultural-Bilingual Studies . The two plan to interview a variety of school administrators, teachers, parents, and students about their views towards the current immersion model.

“We want to see what the needs are, listen to the community voice,” Tian said. He hopes that elements of translanguaging might be implemented in these programs in the future. 

But one factor limiting Tian is still distance. Despite beginning work at UTSA in the summer of 2020, he still lives in Boston and teaches remotely. Boston has its advantages, including proximity to family and friends, and Tian is grateful that he was able to finish his dissertation and begin his new teaching job remotely.

“I think people working in higher ed, we all have this privilege that we can still work from home…I always tell myself, ‘you are still lucky. You can still work from home and finish your dissertation,’” he said.

Nevertheless, he is excited to move down to San Antonio and begin working at UTSA in person.

“I want to be in an environment where I can have multilingual colleagues – that’s what I have right now at the department of BBL – and really respect and celebrate cultural and linguistic diversity,” Tian said. “I’m seeing that UTSA is doing a great job on this; that’s why I think I chose UTSA as my place where I want to go.” 

But whether he’s in Boston or San Antonio, Tian can be proud of his research and his dissertation.

“For now, this is what it is, so I’m happy where I am.” 

- Christopher Reichert

UPDATE: February 2022 Dr. Tian has won two additional dissertation awards in 2022. His dissertation "Translanguaging Design in a Mandarin/English Dual Language Bilingual Education Program: A Researcher-Teacher Collaboration" has now received 4 awards in total. (1) 2022 American Association for Applied Linguistics (AAAL) Dissertation Award; The Dissertation Award began in 2016 to acknowledge a dissertation that demonstrates research excellence, transcends narrow disciplinary fields, and has a broad impact on and implications for the field of applied linguistics as a whole. *This prestigious national research organization only awards 1 winner annually. (2) 2022 AERA Second Language Research SIG Outstanding Dissertation Award; The award goes to the dissertation research that best demonstrates the following criteria: (a) solid theoretical base, (b) sound methodology and data collection, (c) originality, and (d) promising contribution to the field of second language research. *They only award 1 winner annually. These two awards have been shared previously in our COEHD community: (3) 2022 National Association for Bilingual Education (NABE) Outstanding Dissertation Award (Third Place); (4) 2021 AERA Bilingual Education Research SIG Outstanding Dissertation Award (Second Place).

For more information about the American Educational Research Association Bilingual Education Research Special Interest Group, visit https://www.aera.net/SIG012/Bilingual-Education-Research-SIG-12 . 

Tian’s dissertation can be read at https://dlib.bc.edu/islandora/object/bc-ir%3A108914 .

Tags: Cyber , Undergraduate

• Latest News
• Request Info Visit Apply
• Main Building
• One UTSA Circle
• San Antonio, TX 78249
• [email protected]
• 210-458-4370

Stay Connected to the College of Education and Human Development

COEHD will be an international model for developing inclusive, transformative leaders guided by principles of community, integrity, excellence, scholarship and service. The COEHD will have a critical impact on the realization of human and community potential through its leadership in education, health and wellness, human development and policy studies. All programs of study include a focus on developing competencies for working effectively in multicultural and cross-national contexts.

School : California School of Education

Modality(ies) : Online

Calendar(s) : 8-week term

CIP Code : 13.0406

Program Description/Overview

This degree prepares the candidate for leadership in a comprehensive consideration of educational settings inclusive of public and private schools, lower and higher educational settings, and government entities, as well as other private and public organizations.

Emphasis/Concentration/Tracks

This program offers two tracks:

TK-12 Leadership

Higher education leadership, program learning outcomes/goals.

This program prepares competent, confident, and conscientious educational leaders, committed to service and social justice for all in a global society, with the knowledge, skills and abilities to exemplify the following outcomes:

• Lead change in educational organizations in a diverse and global society.
• Understand the philosophical and social underpinnings of world educational systems, multiculturalism and futuristic educational trends and developments.
• Evaluate the political, societal, economic, legal and cultural influence on learning organizations.
• Demonstrate and articulate effective theories and principles of teaching and leading adult learners.
• Model personal and professional ethics, integrity, justice and fairness.
• Evaluate and design research that addresses educational issues.
• Apply educational leadership theory and leadership practice skills to address challenges in Higher Education. 

Internship, Practicum, and/or Dissertation Information

The dissertation phase begins after the student has successfully completed all required courses and has passed the Comprehensive Exam. If a student fails the Comprehensive Exam, the student will be referred to the Student Evaluation and Review Committee (SERC), which may lead to dismissal. Students may conduct research or an applied dissertation, and consider either quantitative or qualitative research methods, after consultation with the course instructor for Dissertation Plan. Students who follow the dissertation guided process should be able to complete their dissertation at the end of the Dissertation Preparation course.

Credit Units

Total Credit Units: 46

Total Core Credit Units: 37

Total Elective Credit Units: N/A

Total Concentration Credit Units: 9

Credit for Previous Work

Transfer of credit may be awarded on the following basis:

• Coursework beyond the master’s degree may be transferred from a regionally accredited institution. All such coursework must have been earned in addition to the master’s degree required coursework.
• Credit that has been used to complete a second master’s degree may be considered for transfer up to 9 units.

Emphasis/Concentration/Track Requirements

• ELM88590 - Current Leadership Trends & Issues in TK12 (3 units)
• ELM88580 - Governance of Educational Systems (3 units)
• ELM88740 - Leadership for the Digital Educator (3 units)
• ELM88110 - Leadership and Change Management (3 units)
• ELM88650 - Higher Education Leadership (3 units)
• ELM88790 - Academic Support Services (3 units)

Curriculum Plan

8-week calendar.

The following curriculum plan is a sample and serves only as a general guide. Curriculum plans and course sequence are subject to variation depending on a student’s start term. Students must complete all coursework required for their program as set forth in their individual master plan of study.

Term 1 (6 units)

• ELM88110 - Leadership and Change Management (3 units) -Higher Education Leadership Track
• ELM88590 - Current Leadership Trends & Issues in TK12 (3 units)   - TK-12 Leadership Track
• GSE80300 - Research Design (3 units)

Term 2 (6 units)

• ELM88300 - Leadership and Learning Organizations (3 units)
• ELM88650 - Higher Education Leadership (3 units) -Higher Education Leadership Track
• ELM88580 - Governance of Educational Systems (3 units)   - TK-12 Leadership Track

Term 3 (6 units)

• GSE80330 - Quantitative Research Methods (3 units)
• ELM88320 - Law, Ethics and Equity (3 units)

Term 4 (6 units)

• ELM88790 - Academic Support Services (3 units) -Higher Education Leadership Track
• ELM88740 - Leadership for the Digital Educator (3 units)   - TK-12 Leadership Track
• ELM88720 - Financial and Business Management (3 units)

Term 5 (6 units)

• ELM81750 - Integrative Technology Systems (3 units)
• GSE80360 - Qualitative Research Methods (3 units)

Term 6 (7 units)

• ELM82100 - Foundations in Multicultural and Global Educational Systems (3 units)
• CCS82100 - Foundations in Multicultural and Global Educational Systems (3 units)    
• ELM89980 - Special Topics Field Project (4 units)

Term 7 (1.5 units)

• GSE99010a - Dissertation Plan (1.5 units)

Term 8 (1.5 units)

• GSE99010b - Dissertation Plan (1.5 units)

Term 9 (1.5 units)

• GSE99020a - Dissertation Proposal (1.5 units)

Term 10 (1.5 units)

• GSE99020b - Dissertation Proposal (1.5 units)

Term 11 (1.5 units)

• GSE99200a - Dissertation Preparation (1.5 units)

Term 12 (1.5 units)

• GSE99200b - Dissertation Preparation (1.5 units)

• Future Students
• New Students
• Current Students
• Faculty & Staff
• High School Counselors
• Alumni & Friends
• News Articles
• SFA's Bilingual Education Student Organization Honored By Texas Association For Bilingual Education

News & Media Center

Sfa's bilingual education student organization honored by texas association for bilingual education.

Stephen F. Austin State University's chapter of the Bilingual Education Student Organization, dedicated to the professional development of bilingual educators, was honored during the Texas Association for Bilingual Education’s Unity Through Excellence Award at the 2024 BESO Spring Leadership Institute. From left are SFA’s BESO chapter members Nayeli Gonzalez, junior from Dayton; Juliana Martinez, senior from Farmers Branch; Hilda Roberson, senior from Troup; and Elizabeth Turrubiartes Villa, senior from Bryan, all of whom are interdisciplinary studies majors. Not pictured are graduate students Maria Almendzarez of Nacogdoches and Pedro Tovar of Marshall.

NACOGDOCHES, Texas — Stephen F. Austin State University's chapter of the Bilingual Education Student Organization was given the Texas Association for Bilingual Education’s Unity Through Excellence Award during the 2024 BESO Spring Leadership Institute.

The award recognizes efforts to foster a supportive community for BESO members while passionately advocating for bilingual education. SFA’s chapter of BESO began in spring 2019.

“We are the only BESO chapter in the state that is not associated with an official bilingual education program,” said Dr. Sarah Straub, associate professor in SFA’s Department of Education Studies and the BESO advisor. “This makes it a major challenge to recruit and retain members, but we are honored that our hard work is recognized. Even if we aren't as large or as prolific as other universities, we are committed to developing as bilingual educators.”

SFA’s BESO chapter members are graduate students Maria Almendzarez of Nacogdoches and Pedro Tovar of Marshall, alongside undergraduate student officers Juliana Martinez, senior from Farmers Branch; Elizabeth Turrubiartes Villa, senior from Bryan; Hilda Roberson, senior from Troup; and Nayeli Gonzalez, junior from Dayton, all of whom are interdisciplinary studies majors.

“I am so glad to see how far we’ve come,” Tovar said. “From the days when we had class in a literal closet to now being recognized at the state level, this award is validating on so many levels.”

Members of SFA’s chapter of BESO have organized professional development opportunities with bilingual guest speakers from across the state; presented at conferences, such as TABE and the National Association for Multicultural Education; and advocated for the inclusion of a special topics introductory course to bilingual education for SFA’s Department of Education Studies.

Because several of its members are online students — another trait that makes SFA’s chapter unique from others across the state — BESO has monthly meetings over Zoom and additional research-focused meetings to support their submissions to TABE. Each semester, they provide at least one opportunity for off-campus members to visit SFA's campus and opportunities for on-campus members to visit other parts of the state. In 2019, for example, BESO members visited a bilingual elementary school in Houston to learn about opportunities in area districts.

This year, BESO hopes to present their Institutional Review Board-approved research at the TABE Conference this October in Round Rock, highlighting their dedication to scholarly inquiry and the advancement of bilingual education.

For more information about BESO, contact Straub at [email protected] or follow them on Instagram @sfa_beso.

Bilingual Endorsement

What you can earn, credits earned, time commitment, an endorsement for current uw students and in-service teachers.

The Bilingual Endorsement program is designed for any certified educators seeking to enhance their ability to better serve and advocate for multilingual learners in their classes, as well as for those who plan to teach in a Dual Language classroom. Elementary MIT Candidates pursuing this endorsement will remain matriculated as UW graduate students through the summer quarter. In-service teachers will register as NM (non-matriculated students).

What you'll learn

The Bilingual Endorsement in Washington is addressed through standards focusing on: 

• Bilingualism and biliteracy,
• Sociocultural competence,
• Dual language instructional practices and pedagogy,
• Authentic assessment in dual language,
• Professionalism, advocacy and agency,
• Program design and curricular leadership.

You will acquire this knowledge and skills in foundations and methods courses. In addition, you may complete a field experience. The competencies are met through coursework and the completion of supervised fieldwork.   

After graduation

After completion of this endorsement, you will be qualified to teach in a target language (Spanish, Mandarin, Japanese, etc.) in a bilingual or Dual Language classroom setting.

Let's connect

For any questions about the program, contact Patricia Ferreyra, Endorsement Coordinator, at [email protected]

For additional information regarding funding for teachers in Dual Language Schools, contact Renee Shank, at [email protected]

For any questions about endorsement and certification requirements, contact Michael Nielsen, Certification Officer, at [email protected]

Registration for In-Service Teachers

There are three steps to the process:, step 1: register for nm status.

(...or GNM with the College of Education only if you want to do a UW Graduate Program in the future and count your ELL/ML credits toward that degree. Note that the College of Education has its own process, which is not the same as for other UW graduate programs. For more information see:   https://education.uw.edu/admissions/non-matriculated-and-graduate-non-matriculated-students ) )

Registering for NM Status

WA State Employees who intend to apply as a first time or returning non-matriculated (not seeking a degree) students under the tuition exemption program must complete the online non-matriculated application for tuition exemption. There is a $80 non-refundable registration fee.

*Contact Patricia Ferreyra or Michael Nielsen if you want to use endorsement credits toward a graduate degree at UW in the future. In that case, you will have to register for GNM status.

Step 2: Complete Tuition Exemption Forms 

The second step is to submit the correct Tuition Exemption Request form for WA State Employees: Complete and submit Washington State Tuition Exemption Request Form [UoW 1250] .

Application Deadline: Completed forms must be submitted no later than two (2) weeks or ten (10) business days before the first day of the quarter. In Spring 2024, the first day of the quarter is March 25th and the first day of classes for the ELL/ML Endorsement is March 26th. In Summer 2024, the first day of the quarter is June 17. The first day of classes for the ELL/ML Endorsement is July 9.

Late Applications: Forms submitted after the deadline date are considered late. Students may have one late submission only; after which tuition exemption forms cannot be accepted.

Step 3: Register for Classes

The third step, once an employee has obtained student status and submitted a tuition exemption form, is to log into https://my.uw.edu and register for courses on the appropriate eligibility date. If you are prompted to enter edcodes, email Patricia Ferreyra at [email protected] .

* WA public employees who are tuition exempt students do not register using the Non-Matriculated (NM) paper registration approval or registration forms, and do not require instructor signatures to register. Review the Registration Policies & Procedures website for additional information.

Registration Eligibility Dates

All non-UW Washington state employees register on the 4th day of the quarter. WA state employees doing tuition exemption can begin registering on February 9th for Spring Quarter: 

Course enrollment is not permitted prior to the appropriate registration eligibility date for all courses when using a tuition exemption. This includes any additional courses even if they are not taken as tuition exempt. 

Students registering before the assigned tuition exemption registration eligibility date will not be permitted to convert to the tuition exemption program, and will be required to pay regular tuition for all registered credits. Course Adds are not accepted after the third week of the quarter.

The Bilingual Endorsement is an intensive, quarter-long program. Your cohort will follow a sequence together. 

Cohorts take the same course sequence together. The following is a sample schedule and is subject to change.

• EDC&I 540: Foundations of Immigrant Schooling (3 credits) 
• EDC&I 542: Approaches to Assessing Second Language Students in K-12 Schools (3 credits)
• EDC&I 545: Multilingual Socialization and Development (3 credits)
• EDC&I 549: Practicum (3 credits)
• EDC&I 554: Bilingual Teaching Methods and Assessment (4 credits)

There is a required practicum seminar where teachers continue to develop their practice teaching bilingual learners through peer support and reflection. 

The summer practicum experience consists of an online asynchronous course. Candidates meet all assignments, participation expectations, and deadlines as articulated in the syllabus and other course materials in the course learning management system. The course may offer learners optional, ungraded opportunities to meet in real time, such as through virtual office hours. 

Upon completion of coursework and fieldwork, you must take the West-E exam 050 to complete the endorsement requirements. You can register for the exam online at http://www.west.nesinc.com/

Admission requirements and process

Before beginning the application process, we recommend reaching out or attending an information session. This will help us get to know you and make sure you have all the information and materials you need to get started on your application!

Please fill out the Summer 2024 intake form .

Your application materials will be manually assessed and checked into the application database. The Endorsement Coordinator will notify applicants about final status by early June.  

Costs and funding

Estimated costs and funding.

The anticipated cost of completing the spring or summer coursework for current graduate students is $6,528 for a resident* plus any registration, practicum and technology fees. Non-matriculated summer fees are approximately $7,062 (see the  Graduate and Professional Tuition Dashboard ).

The following information is for WA state K-12 teachers who want to complete the UW ELL/ML endorsement, and for those who are also applying for a tuition exemption as WA state employees. 

You will most likely register as a "non-matriculated student" (NM). Start by accessing this resource:

• The University Registrar’s guide on how to apply for a tuition exemption as a WA state employee AND register as an NM student:  https://registrar.washington.edu/registration/tuition-exemption/

In-service educators may also wish to explore the Washington Student Achievement Council’s Educator Retooling Conditional Scholarships. For more information, visit: https://wsac.wa.gov/teachers

Please start with the emails or phone numbers shown below for clarifying questions.  

For general questions about the logistics and contents of the ELL/ML Endorsement, reach out to Patricia Ferreyra at  [email protected] .

Education | New Vista High School students have bilingual…

Share this:.

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

Education | New Vista High School students have bilingual education ideas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More in Education

Education | Photos: Front Range Community College Combined Graduation

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

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

Education | Skyline High to host annual spring music festival

Education | St. Vrain Valley hosts annual Unified Day of Champions

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

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

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

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

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