Gibson Ferguson Language Planning and Education Edinburgh ...

Educational and political dimensions of bilingual education 51
to consider a range of outcomes. The findings, though broadly favourable to late exit
bilingual programs making the most use of the native language, are not straightforward.
They may be summarised as follows:
• After four years pupils enrolled in ‘structured immersion’ and early exit TBE
programs performed at similar levels in English language, reading in English
and mathematics when tested in English. Their growth in language and reading
skills was as fast, or faster, than that of ‘a norming population’ receiving no
special treatment. However, attainment in both groups settled at below national
norms.
• There were different levels of attainment at the three late exit sites: at the two
sites with the greater use of Spanish, pupil performance in mathematics at
the end of grade 6 was better than that at the late exit site where pupils were
‘… abruptly transitioned into English instruction’ (Ramirez et al. 1991: 2).
Reading and English language attainment were similar at the three sites and
showed sustained improvement between grades 3 and 6 in contrast with a
decelerated growth rate in pupils in early exit and ‘structured immersion’.
• Late exit programs appeared to encourage greater parental involvement in
schooling.
• In all three program types the teaching methodology provided only a ‘passive
learning environment, limiting students’ opportunities to develop complex
language and critical thinking skills’ (Ramirez 1991: 5).
There were two other conclusions of note. First, consistent with Cummins’s
linguistic interdependence hypothesis (Cummins 1979) (see below), substantial
amounts of instruction in the pupils’ L1 did not impede their acquisition of English
or progress in content subjects. Second, consistent with other studies (e.g. Hakuta
et al. 2000), LEP pupils appeared to take five years or longer to fully develop
academic skills in English.
While these broad conclusions are reasonable inferences from the data, the
Ramirez study is regarded as flawed, quite seriously, by its failure to achieve
comparability between programs in different school sites. In particular, because the
late exit programs were implemented at different sites from those of the early exit and
‘structured immersion’ programs, no legitimate direct comparison of outcomes is
possible, and hence no clear evidence for the relative effectiveness of late exit
bilingual education can be adduced. In this respect the Ramirez study illustrates
some of the difficulties that beset quasi-experimental program evaluations. A
National Research Council committee subsequently withheld its endorsement of
the findings, concluding, in August and Hakuta’s (1997: 11) words, that:
The formal designs of the Longitudinal and Immersion studies were ill-suited to
answering the important policy questions that appear to have motivated them.