Academic and Social Experiences of Spanish Native Speakers in an

University of New Orleans

ScholarWorks@UNO
University of New Orleans Theses and
Dissertations

Dissertations and Theses

5-20-2011

Academic and Social Experiences of Spanish Native Speakers in
an Immersion Program
Brooke Muntean
University of New Orleans

Follow this and additional works at: />
Recommended Citation
Muntean, Brooke, "Academic and Social Experiences of Spanish Native Speakers in an Immersion
Program" (2011). University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 1333.
/>
This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with
permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright
and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rightsholder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the
work itself.
This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an
authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact


Academic and Social Experiences of Spanish Native Speakers in an Immersion Program

A Dissertation

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
University of New Orleans
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy
in
Curriculum and Instruction

by
Brooke Muntean
B.A. San Francisco State University, 1998
M.A.T. New College of California, 2004
May 2011


Copyright 2011, Brooke Muntean




ii



DEDICATION
I would first like to dedicate this dissertation to my mother, who was my original inspiration for
entering the field of education ten years ago. Whereas my mother inspired me to become a
teacher, my father instilled in me the sheer determination to always push forward to the next
level, hence my drive to obtain a doctorate in curriculum and instruction. I only wish that you
could both be here to share in this experience with me. It gives me some satisfaction, however,

to know how proud you both would have been of my accomplishments.
I also would like to dedicate my dissertation to my two daughters, Stella and Zoe. Stella, you
were born when I was a year into this process, and patiently have waited these last three years for
mommy to get home from class so that we can play. I particularly realized how formative this
experience has been for you the other day, when I observed you playing “dissertation”. Zoe, you
have been with me on the last leg of this journey, or the data collection, analysis and write-up of
my dissertation. I am so glad that both during pregnancy and in the months after your birth, you
could literally be with me every step of the way.
I have saved my most important dedication until last, or to my husband, Matt Kyte. You
have never stopped believing in me and my aspirations for even a moment, and I would not have
come this far without your unwavering love and support. Thank you from the bottom of my
heart for all that you have done to help me in completing this degree. You are a phenomenally
brilliant person, and I am very fortunate to have you in my life.




iii



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
It has taken me almost four years to come this far in the pursuit of a doctorate, and the
last leg of the journey, or completing a dissertation, has been particularly challenging. It would
never have been possible for me to reach this point without the support of numerous friends,
family members, colleagues, and professors. For this reason, I would like to take this
opportunity to thank those who have helped me in realizing my goal.
I first need to begin by giving thanks to the education faculty at New College of
California. I greatly appreciate having been a part of such an outstanding and inspirational
teacher education program. I hope that the faculty of this program realizes that they were far
reaching in their influence of the teaching practice of educators all over the country. In
particular, I would like to thank Dr. Sudia Paloma and Dr. Sasha Mitchell. Sudia, you instilled in

me a drive to teach for social justice and equity, and this focus has kept me in education for these
past nine years. In particular, you inspired me to search out the voices of oftentimesmarginalized students, which directly led to my interest in learning more from the experiences of
Latino students in post-Katrina New Orleans. Sasha, you were my first introduction to
qualitative research, and you equally motivated me to continue to learn about all that this method
of inquiry has to offer. Thank you for all of your feedback and support in the completion of my
master’s thesis, and for encouraging me to continue in my research endeavors by pursuing a
doctorate.
Next, I would like to thank the members of the remarkable faculty at the University of
New Orleans, who have helped me to refine my educational interests over the last four years.
Dr. Barnitz, your expertise in the areas of immersion and second language acquisition has been a
tremendous help for me in the development of my research question and my literature review.




iv



Thank you for all of your notes, comments, and support; you greatly influenced the direction of
my dissertation. Dr. Speaker, I truly appreciate your pushing me to read and think outside of my
smaller window of immersion education. My seminars with you helped me to identify and
describe my theoretical framework. Also, thank you for all of your help in clarifying the design
and methodology of my study; your guidance gave me a far clearer understanding of what
exactly I was hoping to accomplish. Additionally, I’d like to thank Dr. Perry for bringing his
fresh and unique perspective to my committee. I greatly appreciate your expertise in and
commitment to the education of undocumented students.
Two other professors were particularly influential in the direction that I took in
completing this dissertation: Dr. Ivan Gill and Dr. Martha Ward. Both of these professors
pushed me to think outside of the box that I had created for myself in my research interests. Dr.
Gill encouraged me to consider other perspectives on research methods, and in particular to be
more open-minded to a world outside of qualitative research. Dr. Ward pushed me to think

outside of the realm of educational research, and taught me a great deal about the connections to
be made between cultural anthropology and my own research interests.
I would like to give a special appreciation to my major professor, Dr. April Bedford.
From the moment I took my first course with Dr. Bedford, I knew that she would be a perfect
match for me in my research pursuits. I so appreciate your progressive, open-minded approach
to research, and the support that you have given to me as your student over these last four years.
You always made time for me when I had questions or concerns, and you have whole-heartedly
believed in me from the beginning. Thank you for your hard work and dedication to the students
in curriculum and instruction.




v



I would also like to acknowledge some members of the doctoral cohort at UNO. My
pursuit of a doctorate was far richer due to what I learned from you in seminars and research
courses. Thank you Sandra, Julie, Eleo, Therese, Brandi, Alyson, and Marika, for sharing in this
experience with me.
It is crucial that I thank Sara Leikin, with whom I had the great fortune of working over
this past year. Sara is such a unique principal, in that she fully understands the importance of
educational research in a school setting. Thank you for trusting me to collect data within our
school site, and allowing me to dedicate so much time to completing my doctorate.
Next, I acknowledge the most important group in this entire process, or the participants in
my study. Thank you to the five teachers who took the time to share their stories with me, even
though they had an extremely busy schedule this past year. I also would like to thank the
seventeen student participants and their parents, for placing their trust in me to learn from their
experiences. I hope that I have effectively put into words your perspectives on being an English
learner in an immersion setting.
Last, I would like to acknowledge the important contribution that my family and friends

have made to this process. Thank you to my husband, Matt, and my sisters, Heather and Erin,
for believing in my ability to complete this degree. I’d also like to thank my friends, in particular
Cassie, Tanya, and Victoria, who always showed an interest in where I was in my pursuit of a
doctorate, and who were also willing to read early drafts.




vi



TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables .................................................................................................................. xiii
Abstract........................................................................................................................... xiv
Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................1
Statement of the problem .........................................................................................1
Standards of best practice in immersion education..................................................3
Overarching research question.................................................................................4
Purpose for the research...........................................................................................4
Rationale and significance .......................................................................................5
Key terms and operational definitions .....................................................................7
Theoretical framework...........................................................................................10
Introduction................................................................................................10
Critical theory ............................................................................................11
Phenomenological methodology................................................................14
Chapter 2: Literature Review.........................................................................................16
Introduction............................................................................................................16
Background ............................................................................................................18
The national debate ....................................................................................18
The English only movement ..........................................................19
Comparing the benefits of various models ....................................21

Benefits of bilingual education ......................................................23
Arguments for bilingual education ............................................................25
Heritage languages as an asset, not an problem.............................25
Newcomers programs ....................................................................26
Global perspectives on bilingual education ...................................26
Bilingual education and New Orleans .......................................................27
Attitudes towards bilingualism in the Southeast............................27
Bilingual education in Louisiana and New Orleans ......................29
Conclusion: Background on bilingual education.......................................33
Latino students and dual language education ........................................................33
Benefits of dual language education for Latino students...........................34
Latino students’ attitudes towards bilingual education..................35
Intercultural sensitivity ..................................................................37
Possible challenges for Latino students .....................................................37
Needs of bilingual education programs .........................................38
Self-designated dual language programs .......................................39
Attrition..........................................................................................40
Roles of SNS’s versus ENS’s ........................................................41
Integrating content and language ...............................................................42
Language usage..............................................................................42
Remaining in the L2.......................................................................44
CALP .............................................................................................44




vii



Spanish for Spanish speakers in dual language programs .............45
An exemplary model......................................................................46

Latino parents.............................................................................................47
Teachers’ attitudes .....................................................................................49
Conclusion .............................................................................................................50
Chapter 3: Methodology..................................................................................................51
Biographical statement...........................................................................................51
The setting..............................................................................................................52
Description of the setting ...........................................................................52
Evolution of the setting..............................................................................55
The participants......................................................................................................56
Sampling procedures..................................................................................56
Protecting the participants..........................................................................57
Methods of data collection.....................................................................................60
Assessment.................................................................................................61
Student interest survey...................................................................62
Informal reading inventory ............................................................62
LAS Links: Placement test.............................................................63
Scholastic Reading Inventory ........................................................63
Words Their Way...........................................................................64
Aimsweb Math Benchmark ...........................................................64
End of Course Assessments ...........................................................65
Writing samples .............................................................................66
Observation ................................................................................................66
Memos............................................................................................66
Informal observations ....................................................................67
Formal observations.......................................................................67
CLASS observations......................................................................69
Interview ....................................................................................................70
Sociograms.....................................................................................70
Formal interviews ..........................................................................71
Data analysis ..............................................................................................72

Description of data analysis ...........................................................72
Monitoring my biases ....................................................................74
Chapter 4: Findings .........................................................................................................76
Description of findings ..........................................................................................76
Description of the participants ...............................................................................78
The students ...............................................................................................78
ESOL and Immersion ....................................................................88
Alejandra............................................................................88
Carlos .................................................................................89
Carmen...............................................................................89
Elena ..................................................................................90
Luis ....................................................................................90
ESOL Only.....................................................................................90
Alvaro ................................................................................90




viii



Jimena ................................................................................91
Manuel ...............................................................................91
Maria ..................................................................................91
Natalia ................................................................................91
Rosalinda............................................................................92
Sofia ...................................................................................92
Immersion Only .............................................................................92
Francisco ............................................................................92
Jason...................................................................................93
Raul ....................................................................................93

Roberto...............................................................................93
Stefano ...............................................................................94
The teachers ...............................................................................................94
Chad ...............................................................................................97
Cynthia...........................................................................................97
Martha ............................................................................................98
Matthew .........................................................................................98
Steven.............................................................................................98
Major findings........................................................................................................99
The students ...............................................................................................99
Academic growth ...........................................................................99
Student interest survey.....................................................100
Informal reading inventory ..............................................105
LAS Links: Placement Test .............................................109
Scholastic Reading Inventory ..........................................111
Words Their Way.............................................................115
Aimsweb Math Benchmark .............................................118
End of Course Assessments .............................................121
Summary of academic growth .........................................125
Sociogram ....................................................................................128
Academic questions .........................................................128
Social questions ...............................................................138
Student preferences..........................................................144
Summary of sociogram ....................................................147
The teachers .............................................................................................149
Observations ................................................................................149
CLASS Dimensions observations....................................149
Formal and informal observations ...................................154
Academic themes .................................................155
Emphasis on language development........155

Need for differentiated instruction...........158
Classroom management ...........................162
English mainstream classes..........162
Spanish immersion classes...........163
Social themes .......................................................163
Positive teacher-student relationships......164




ix



Strong sense of community......................164
Insular behavior .......................................166
Racial tension...........................................167
Developing intercultural sensitivity.........168
Summary of observations ................................................170
Interviews.................................................................................................171
Introductory themes .....................................................................171
Challenges for ELs...........................................................172
Limited English proficiency ................................172
Socio-economic status .........................................173
Undocumented status ...........................................176
Benefits of Spanish immersion ........................................177
Best experience this year .....................................178
Benefits of a bilingual staff..................................178
Summary of introductory themes.....................................179
Academic themes .........................................................................180
Emphasis on language development................................180
Maintaining Spanish ............................................181

Remaining in target language ..............................187
Differentiated instruction .................................................189
Program placement ..............................................190
Math .....................................................................194
Language challenges................................194
Assessment...............................................195
Biology.................................................................197
ENS vs. SNS teachers ..............................197
Connections between languages ..............198
ESOL....................................................................201
Multiple levels .........................................201
Decline in differentiated instruction ........202
Read 180 ..................................................204
Spanish immersion...............................................205
Academic Spanish....................................206
Pace of class.............................................208
Classroom management ...................................................210
English mainstream..............................................211
Spanish immersion/ESOL classes........................212
Summary of academic themes .........................................216
Social themes ...............................................................................218
Positive teacher-student relationships..............................219
Strong sense of community..............................................221
Parent outreach.....................................................223
Group work ..........................................................226
Insular behavior ...............................................................229
Immersion/ESOL program as “tracking”.............230
Effects of language proficiency ...........................232




x



Avoidance ............................................................234
Racial tension...................................................................237
Reactions to Spanish language.............................239
“The Mexicans” ...................................................241
ENS students in the immersion program .............242
French class..........................................................244
Cinco de Mayo celebration ..................................246
The bus.................................................................247
Bullying ...............................................................249
Individuals versus generalizations .......................252
8.5-ers ..................................................................255
Developing intercultural sensitivity (ICS) .......................257
Arkansas trip ........................................................258
Diversity in the immersion program ....................258
Advisory class......................................................260
Summary of social themes ...............................................262
Chapter 5: Discussion ....................................................................................................266
Introduction..........................................................................................................266
Summary of the study ..........................................................................................267
Introduction..............................................................................................267
Literature review......................................................................................269
Methodology ............................................................................................271
Summary of the findings......................................................................................273
Assessment/Academic growth .................................................................274
Program placement ......................................................................274
Differentiated instruction .............................................................274

Emphasis on language development............................................275
Math and Science assessments.....................................................275
Sociogram ................................................................................................275
Group work ..................................................................................276
Insular behavior ...........................................................................276
Racial tension...............................................................................276
Observations ............................................................................................277
Emphasis on language development............................................277
Differentiated instruction .............................................................277
Classroom management ...............................................................278
Positive teacher-student relationships..........................................278
Strong sense of community..........................................................278
Insular behavior ...........................................................................279
Racial tension...............................................................................279
Intercultural sensitivity ................................................................279
Interviews.................................................................................................280
Challenges for ELs.......................................................................280
Benefits of Spanish immersion ....................................................280
Emphasis on language development............................................281
Differentiated instruction .............................................................281




xi



Classroom management ...............................................................281
Positive teacher-student relationships..........................................282
Strong sense of community .........................................................282
Insular behavior ...........................................................................282

Racial tension...............................................................................282
Intercultural sensitivity ................................................................283
Conclusion ...........................................................................................................284
Limitations and delimitations of the study...........................................................290
Delimitations............................................................................................290
Limitations ...............................................................................................291
Implications..........................................................................................................292
Recommendations for future research .................................................................294
Summary of discussion ........................................................................................296
References.......................................................................................................................298
Appendices......................................................................................................................303
Appendix A: Human subjects approval ...............................................................303
Appendix B: Adult consent form.........................................................................305
Appendix C: Parent consent form (English)........................................................308
Appendix D: Parent consent form (Spanish) .......................................................311
Appendix E: Student assent form (English).........................................................314
Appendix F: Student assent form (Spanish) ........................................................317
Appendix G: Principal’s letter of permission ......................................................320
Appendix H: CLASS Dimensions observation rubric .........................................322
Appendix I: Sociogram interview guide ..............................................................325
Appendix J: ESOL student interview guide (English).........................................327
Appendix K: ESOL student interview guide (Spanish).......................................331
Appendix L: Non-ESOL student interview guide ...............................................335
Appendix M: Teacher interview guide ................................................................338
Vita ..................................................................................................................................342




xii


LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Students: ESOL and/or immersion programs ......................................................78
Table 2: Students: ESOL, Biology Immersion, and/or Literature Immersion classes.......79
Table 3: Students: Demographics ......................................................................................80
Table 4: Students: Linguistic History ................................................................................86
Table 5: Teachers: Demographics .....................................................................................94
Table 6: Teachers: Education and teaching experience.....................................................95
Table 7: Student interest survey: Questions about reading..............................................100
Table 8: Student interest survey: Other questions ...........................................................103
Table 9: Informal reading inventory ................................................................................105
Table 10: LAS Links: Placement test: EL group levels...................................................109
Table 11: Scholastic Reading Inventory ..........................................................................111
Table 12: Words Their Way ............................................................................................115
Table 13: Aimsweb Math benchmark..............................................................................118
Table 14: End of Course assessment ...............................................................................121
Table 15: Sociogram: Academic questions......................................................................128
Table 16: Sociogram: Social questions............................................................................138
Table 17: Sociogram: Student preferences ......................................................................144
Table 18: CLASS observations........................................................................................149
Table 19: Teachers: Professional development goals......................................................159




xiii



ABSTRACT

The purpose of this research is to explore the academic and social experiences of

English learners (ELs) in a Spanish immersion program. The researcher is specifically interested
in learning about both the English and Spanish language acquisition of these ELs, as well as their
social interactions as this pertains to their academic development. The participants were a
sample of 12 Spanish native speakers who were working towards acquiring both social and
academic English. Additionally, the researcher interviewed five other students who were in the
Spanish immersion program, but who were not included in the ESOL class. These 17 students
represented a wide range of English language proficiencies, ranging from emergent to advanced,
and were in the ninth grade during the period of data collection. The researcher also interviewed
five of these students’ teachers, so as to gain a better understanding of the experiences of these
heritage speakers.
Data were collected over the course of the 2009-2010 school year through observations,
interviews, sociograms, and ongoing assessments. These assessments were collected from
several sources, including an English language assessment that was administered by the ESOL
coordinator, an ongoing school-wide assessment of lexile scores, and an English and Spanish
informal reading inventory.
The findings of this study were divided into two meta themes of the academic and social
experiences of the student participants. In investigating these students’ academic experiences,
the researcher found that the 22 participants placed a considerable emphasis on language
development, particularly in the maintenance of the Spanish native speakers’ heritage language.
A sizeable need existed, however, for instruction that was better differentiated to the wide range




xiv



of proficiencies that these students demonstrated in both English and Spanish. Through the
analysis of the participants’ social experiences, the researcher also discovered that a strong sense
of community existed amongst the participants in the ESOL and immersion programs. This
interconnectedness, however, led to an insular behavior amongst the Spanish native speakers,

which further exacerbated the racial tension that existed at Greenwood High. Greenwood as a
whole would greatly benefit from the fostering of intercultural sensitivity amongst this
multicultural and multilingual student body.



English Learners, Spanish Immersion Program, Second Language Acquisition, Spanish Native
Speakers, Intercultural Sensitivity




xv






CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

The research problem that I chose to investigate was that Spanish-speaking students were
being accepted to a foreign language immersion program that was not originally designed for
their particular needs. According to Lanker and Rhodes (2007), “Foreign language immersion
programs, also referred to as one-way immersion programs, are designed for English-speaking
students” to learn to speak Spanish fluently. For this reason, often times the Spanish instruction
is not challenging enough for English learners, and the English instruction is incorrectly focused.
My research question is whether Spanish-speaking students can be fully accommodated in such a
program, or are they being added to these programs as an administrative necessity or
convenience? Additionally, if these students are to be accepted to a foreign language program

that was not designed for their needs, then what specific accommodations must be in place to
ensure that they are finding success in both their English and Spanish acquisition?
According to recent literature in this field, immersion programs often struggle with
attrition (Rigaud, 2005). As students enter upper elementary, class sizes began to shrink, and it




1





is difficult to replace these students with children who are fully bilingual. Research has also
shown that students who are fully bilingual will find more academic success in immersion
programs. Having larger class sizes economically benefits public charter immersion schools, as
the government pays these programs according to the number of students enrolled. So a question
arises as to why foreign language immersion programs are accepting already fluent Spanish
speakers who instead need to learn English, and how these programs can accommodate these
students’ needs.
Another common concern in the research literature is that these Spanish-speaking
students may be placed in these foreign language programs because they are excellent models of
proficient Spanish for the English native speakers in the classroom (Larocco, 2003). Are these
Spanish native speakers there for the benefit of the English-speaking students, or are they there
because this is the best program available for their acquisition of both Spanish and English?
Last, what issues of socio-economic status are at play in this dichotomy that has been
created? Many Spanish-speaking students who are being added to these immersion programs are
from recently immigrated families from Latin America. Their parents are often not fluent
English speakers, and may not feel confident advocating for their children’s education in a
foreign language. Additionally, these parents may not be accustomed to questioning the
practices of their children’s educational settings; this could be due to their past educational
experiences in their native countries, or their current documentation status in the United States.

So this brings rise to another pertinent question: to what degree is the administration of such a
foreign-language program listening to the voices of newly immigrated Hispanic parents? How
does this dynamic affect the accommodations that are made by teachers for their EL students?




2





Standards of Best Practice in Immersion Education

The Center for Applied Linguistics recently conducted a comparison of their 2006
directory of immersion programs with past years’ results, which demonstrated a “steady increase
in foreign language immersion education in U.S. schools over the last 35 years” (Lenker, et al.).
Although this expansion could prove beneficial for the large number of multilingual citizens in
the United States, it also creates a need for the development of standards of best practice. Great
effort has been made in this direction, and there are currently more resources available for
administrators and educators of dual language programs. Freeman, Freeman, and Mercuri
(2004) recently published a book entitled Dual Language Essentials for Teachers and
Administrators. For the purpose of clarification, I will briefly discuss some of the standards of
best practices that have been outlined by these researchers.
Freeman et al. defined a particular type of immersion, or dual language program, in
which students are educated in two or more languages. These programs have been found to have
more success when all stakeholders are fully aware of the goals and benefits of immersion
education. Additionally, there is a need in these programs for a commitment to “academic and
social equity, particularly between the two language groups” (Freeman, 2005, p. XX.)
Administrators need to ensure that classrooms are consistent; that teachers have time to plan
together, and that there are opportunities for high-quality professional development.
Additionally, there is a need in dual language programs for teachers and administrators to

respond to parents’ concerns, as often times parents feel uncertain of what is taking place in the
school, as they may not be fluent in the target language. The school should also “include parents
from both language groups, and promote and explain dual language to parents and community




3





members” (p. 214). Last, teachers and administrators should work to “develop high levels of
proficiency in both languages, or at least proficiency in one language and a receptive knowledge
of the other” (Freeman, 2005, p. 87).

Overarching Research Question

In a Spanish foreign language immersion program, (from English to Spanish), what is the
experience of EL (English Learners) who are attempting to acquire English from the opposite
direction, (or from Spanish to English)?

Purpose for the Research

•

To learn about the academic and social experiences of Spanish native speakers in a oneway foreign language immersion program that was originally designed for English native
speakers to acquire Spanish.

•

To determine how teachers are adjusting their practice to accommodate Spanish native

speakers in a Spanish foreign language immersion program. To learn more about how
these teachers are succeeding with these students, and what the teachers’ areas of need
are.

•

To investigate the economic, political and social conditions in which these programs
exist, and how these conditions influence the experiences of these Spanish native
speakers.




4





Rationale and Significance

Contemporary research demonstrates that English learners far too often slip through the
cracks of the educational system. In a recent synthesis of research on English learners, Christian,
Genesee, Lindholm-Leary, and Saunders (2006) found that the level of academic achievement
for English learners “lagged significantly behind that of native English speakers” (p. 1). They go
on to state the following:
ELs receive lower grades, are judged by their teachers to have lower academic abilities, and
score below their classmates on standardized tests of reading and mathematics. According to
a compilation of reports from 41 state educational agencies, only 18.7 percent of students
classified as limited English proficient (LEP) met the state norm for reading in English.
Furthermore, students from language minority backgrounds have higher dropout rates and are
more frequently placed in lower ability groups and academic tracks than language majority
students. (Christian et al., p. 1)

Immersion education offers great potential for these students. In a high-quality immersion
program, EL students are able to maintain their native language, helping these children to
transfer content knowledge to English.
Additionally, in recent years the government has put forth an increased demand for more
multilingual citizens, for both economic and political reasons. A post-9/11 report of the House
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (H.R. Rep. No. 107-219, 2001), identified language
as the single greatest need of the intelligence community. Senator Paul Simon stated that “some
80 federal agencies need proficiency in nearly 100 foreign languages. While the demand is great,
the supply remains almost nonexistent. Only 8% of American college students study another
language” (Christian et al., 2005). Research has demonstrated that in a high-quality immersion
program, EL students are able to both maintain their native language while acquiring English;




5





consequently, such programs could satisfy the government’s demand for an increase in language
proficiency.
Immersion programs in the United States face the unique challenge of attrition. These
programs often begin with a Kindergarten cohort of approximately 20 English native speakers,
who then become proficient in a second language throughout their elementary education. These
immersion programs often struggle with the issue of attrition: essentially, children who later
leave the program need to be replaced. Schools rely on federal funding, and must innovate in
running schools with a reduced number of immersion students (Rigaud, 2005).
Research has demonstrated that it is best practice to accept students in the upper immersion
grades who are fully bilingual, or at least academically proficient in one of the two languages
(Freeman, 2005). Due to attrition, immersion schools might be tempted to accept newly arrived
immigrants who do not necessarily fit this description. If schools choose to accept these children,

they need to take the necessary steps to accommodate their needs.
The parents of these EL students often come from a lower social economic status, and they
may not be proficient in English. These parents frequently have a difficult time navigating
complex educational institutions. Too often in education, the expression “the squeaky wheel
gets the oil” rings true. Recently immigrated parents are frequently unable or hesitant to
question whether the needs of their children are being fully met at a school. There consequently
remains a need for advocacy for EL students in this country. In addition, it is crucial that highquality research be conducted so as to assure that all students are receiving equal opportunities
within the classroom.
This study is of particular interest to me, due to its unique setting in post-Katrina New
Orleans. Since the hurricane, New Orleans has experienced an influx of newly arrived native




6





Spanish speakers, as well as a burgeoning charter school system, in which schools are
experimenting with ground-breaking programs. In the last three years, several self-designated
immersion programs have developed in the New Orleans area. The question thereby remains:
are these programs merely immersion education in name, or do they actually fit the established
criteria for immersion education (Han, et al., 2005)? Will these new immersion programs follow
the standards in best practice that have been created by leading language research centers, such
as the Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) and the Center for Advanced Research in Language
Acquisition (CARLA)?
In my own review of the literature, I have found substantial research on English native
speakers in foreign language programs, as well as on Spanish native speakers in transitional or
maintenance programs. I have found less literature on the experiences of Spanish native
speakers in two-way immersion programs; this research tends to focus more on the role of the
English native speakers. Additionally, I have found minimal literature on what is specifically

happening at the immersion school where I will be conducting my research. This site is a unique
case, in that this school is accepting Spanish native speakers to an immersion program that was
not originally designed for their needs. By researching this exceptional phenomenon, I hope to
shed light on what might be taking place in other immersion schools. I also hope that this
research might contribute to the decision making of appropriate stakeholders, so that they can
create programs that can best address the needs of all students.

Key Terms and Operational Definitions

•




Immersion Education

7





•

Dual Language Education

•

Bilingual Education

•

Foreign Language Education

•

English Learners

•

Latino Students

•

Spanish Native Speakers

•

English as a Second Language

English Learners
English Learners, or ELs, is a current term that is used in the realm of education to label a
student who is learning to speak English as a new language. In this study, I will be focusing on a
particular group of ELs, or students who are native speakers of Spanish, and who are now
attempting to acquire English in a Foreign Language immersion program. These students have
often only recently immigrated to the United States from Latin America. Their parents are
frequently day laborers, who have joined the New Orleans work force due to the post-Katrina
construction boom. For the purposes of this paper, I will often times refer to these ELs as
Spanish native speakers. I will refer to the other group in the immersion program as English
native speakers.
ESOL/ESL Instruction
ESOL and ESL are terms that are often used to describe the special instruction that English
learners receive in the classroom. ESOL stands for English for speakers of other languages,

whereas ESL stands for English as a second language. For the purposes of this study, I will




8





predominantly be using the term ESOL, as that is the label that was used by school officials
within my research site.
ESOL instruction can either be provided by the mainstream classroom teacher through
special modifications to the lesson, or by an ESOL instructor who might “push-in” or “pull-out”
of the classroom. In the push-in model, the ESOL instructor would join the EL students in their
regular classroom for extra assistance. In the pullout model, the ESOL/ESL instructor will pull
these students out in small groups for tutoring.
Heritage Language
According to Kelleher (2008), the term heritage language is used to “identify languages other
than the dominant language (or languages) in a given social context.” (3) Although English is not
the official language of the United States, it is arguably the dominant language, meaning that all
other languages could be considered a heritage language. I use this term to describe the maternal
language of the Spanish native speakers in the study.
Accommodate
Accommodate means to use a specific pedagogical strategy in order to ensure that all
students are learning to their full capacity. With students who are acquiring English as a new
language, accommodate takes on an additional meaning. With English Learners, often referred
to as ELs, teachers need to take additional steps to make sure that these students are learning the
academic content while also acquiring both social and academic English.
Foreign Language Immersion
Foreign language immersion programs are one-way programs, meaning that there is one
group of students who speak one language, and they are working to acquire a target language.

These programs are referred to as foreign language, because the students are learning to speak a




9