Fawn Johnson hits the nail on the head when she writes, "The truth is that a robust vocabulary in any language is good for a child." It’s a statement that is supported by research and a message that we should make sure all parents understand. Again, language development, foreign or otherwise, for any student is valuable. It helps young children develop a basic sense of literacy that they will retain and sustain throughout their educational career, whether their first language is English or not. Exposure to multiple languages is far from a threat and certainly not a detriment, as some detractors have suggested. Rather, it is an educational approach to teaching that has yielded both impressive qualitative and quantitative results. The research certainly suggests that the cognitive benefits of dual language learning are many. Consider the finding that early exposure to two languages not only has a positive impact on the linguistic, cognitive, and reading development of young children, but that bilingualism imparts no developmental disadvantages. We can also point to real world examples, as we did in the reports referenced in Johnson's question this week. One visit to the NCLR Affiliate, LAMB Charter School, will do this. Theirs is a model that has been very successful in producing excellent student outcomes. It is fascinating to walk down the halls of the school and see and hear 5th graders of all races and ethnicities engage in conversation fully bilingual. It's evident that the school provides something that has mass appeal to a variety of communities, something we know would translate well in neighborhoods across America. It’s also evident that LAMB is empowering and engaging parents to help them support their children’s literacy and learning – a strategy more schools need to adopt. For Latino communities, one of the greatest challenges is helping parents understand what they need to ensure their children enter school ready for success. We work hard through our parent engagement programs to empower them to ask the right questions, to equip them with materials and resources, and to encourage them to expose their children to literacy in any language. Most importantly, our programs help parents understand the importance of nurturing adult-child relationships that support young children’s literacy development and emotional well-being. The payoffs of family engagement programs, like the one we profiled in the reports we recently released, are huge. Children whose parents understand the basics of language development are better equipped to support their learning. Though parents play a vital role in helping their children achieve success, schools and programs must also take the necessary steps to ensure that families have the information and resources they need. It’s the only way to achieve the successful educational outcomes we all want for America's kids.

Like many Americans, I began studying a foreign language for the first time in high school. I remember being thrilled at the prospect of speaking Spanish fluently—and I remember being frequently frustrated. Come 9th grade, many U.S. students find themselves cracking open a French I or Beginner’s Spanish book for the first time. Some students stick with foreign language study for two years, some for four years, fewer make the leap to study language in college, and a precious handful stay fluent into adulthood. In a 2008 study, the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) reported that most foreign language education occurs in middle or high school, and that only 30 percent of all secondary school students are enrolled in foreign language courses. This secondary school approach is well entrenched in American classrooms, but is woefully outdated considering (1) what we now know about language instruction and cognitive science, and (2) the ever-growing importance of bi-lingual and multi-lingual speakers in our globalized world.

Language learning should begin early -- much earlier than secondary school -- for any child learning a second language. In today’s classrooms, this means both English-speaking students learning second language, and English language learners. We are fortunate to have a wealth of research on the benefits of learning a second language – and learning it early. In fact, many studies over the several decades have shown the correlation between bilingualism and increased cognitive development and abilities. (Those interested in exploring this research further should look here, to ACTFL’s website).

Dual-immersion, sometimes called two-way immersion, is a particularly interesting language learning model that reflects the diversity of modern classrooms and utilizes current research on early learning. Dual immersion programs feature instruction in two languages for equally divided time, for example, 50 percent of a day’s instruction in English and 50 percent in Spanish. In addition, a dual-immersion Spanish/English classroom would consist of 50 percent native English speakers and 50 percent native Spanish speakers. While it seems confusing for adults, children are masters at sorting out their environments; they know when and with whom to use each language. Research shows that such programs are beneficial for both ELL and native English students. Utah has even deployed the dual-immersion model statewide throughout its public schools.

It’s clear to me that the discussion should not be about whether to teach foreign languages (answer: yes!) or when to start (answer: early!) but rather, how can we best design classrooms and curricula that address the needs of America’s diverse classrooms. Despite my years of language learning, my ability to speak Spanish doesn’t go far beyond everyday greetings and salutations. I don’t blame my language instructors, nor do I blame a lack of self-determination. The system for teaching foreign language is simply in need of a 21st Century renovation. I hope that in the next decade, schools and districts throughout the country shift to innovative approaches – like dual-immersion classrooms – and finally replace high-school centered language instruction. So that when the time comes for the next generation to take the lead and tackle 21st Century challenges, the communication will be that much easier.

The response below was written by my colleague Maggie Severns, policy analyst for the Early Education Initiative at the New America Foundation.

When it comes to instructing young English language learners, there are best practices for teaching that are specific to non-English speaking children. Often these strategies appear similar to the strategies used in regular classroom teaching yet they are distinct, and teachers benefit from having an extra level of training on the science and pedagogy of instruction for young non-English speaking students.

In order to build a child’s vocabulary, for example, teachers with English language learners need to know how to help children navigate between two sets of pronunciation rules or in some cases different alphabets. When communicating with and engaging parents, teachers may need additional strategies that can help non-English speaking parents feel more comfortable in the school. As teachers with young English language learners have repeatedly told me, these teaching practices are distinct from standard best practices for early education – and they often aren’t intuitive, either.

In a recent paper, I’ve highlighted Illinois as one state that is working to improve the experience for English language learners in preschool by mandating, among other things, better professional development for teachers and some instruction in a child’s home language while at school. These decisions, aside from improving the quality of instruction for young non-English speakers, send a clear message to students and parents: The non-English languages students hear at home are integral to their learning and development. (The paper, Starting Early with English Language Learners: First Lesson from Illinois can be found here.)

As more and more schools find themselves serving students from a variety of language backgrounds, the question of how to best educate young English language learners will surface more often among teachers and other education stakeholders. It is important that strategies for teaching young English language learners are taught more often in teacher preparation and other professional development programs so teachers are equipped to help students and parents learn best.

NCLR’s report accurately underscores the need to increase access to high-quality preschool opportunities for all three- and four-year-old children. Young children who enter school with limited or no English language skills depend on their schools almost entirely for English language and vocabulary development.

The academic achievement gaps between English language learners and their native English-speaking peers begin early and grow wider over time. By first grade there is a full one-year reading gap between English language learners and their English-proficient peers, which grows to a two-year gap by the fifth grade. High-quality preschool opportunities can reduce these gaps.

But we shouldn’t stop with preschool. Providing English learners with increased learning time along the PK-12 educational pipeline is important, as is the manner in which this time is used. A 2009 Center for American Progress report—Putting the Pieces of the Puzzle Together—argues that increased learning time coupled with school-wide systematic vocabulary instruction can improve reading comprehension and vocabulary outcomes for children learning English.

Using increased learning time for vocabulary instruction makes sense. Despite the vocabulary and reading gaps that persist between English language learners and their peers, the typical classroom dedicates only 5 to 10 percent of instructional time to vocabulary development. And, intensive vocabulary instruction is virtually absent at the middle and high school level.

The good news is that that good reading instruction for English language learners is fairly similar to good reading instruction for English-proficient students. The 2006 National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth report found that instruction that focuses on phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and text comprehension is equally critical for students who are fluent in English and those who are learning English.

But there are some key differences. Children who are learning English need early, more focused, and consistent support than their English-fluent peers to develop their vocabulary and reading comprehension skills.[4] English learners also need focused instruction that will support their oral language development, which tends to be absent in classroom instruction. Our schools must find ways to incorporate more instruction targeted to the development of these skills. High-quality preschool opportunities and expanded learning time in K-12 schools can make this possible.

[4] Diane August and Timothy Shanahan, Eds., Developing Literacy in Second-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth (Mahwah: Erlbaum, 2006); David J. Francis et al., “Practical Guidelines for the Education of English Language Learners: Research-Based Recommendations for Instruction and Academic Interventions,” (Portsmouth: Center on Instruction, RMC Research Corporation, 2006).