18.2.3: Bilingualism
- Page ID
- 225551
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)
\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)
\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)
\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)
\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)
\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)
\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)
\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}} % arrow\)
\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)
\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)
\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)
\(\newcommand{\avec}{\mathbf a}\) \(\newcommand{\bvec}{\mathbf b}\) \(\newcommand{\cvec}{\mathbf c}\) \(\newcommand{\dvec}{\mathbf d}\) \(\newcommand{\dtil}{\widetilde{\mathbf d}}\) \(\newcommand{\evec}{\mathbf e}\) \(\newcommand{\fvec}{\mathbf f}\) \(\newcommand{\nvec}{\mathbf n}\) \(\newcommand{\pvec}{\mathbf p}\) \(\newcommand{\qvec}{\mathbf q}\) \(\newcommand{\svec}{\mathbf s}\) \(\newcommand{\tvec}{\mathbf t}\) \(\newcommand{\uvec}{\mathbf u}\) \(\newcommand{\vvec}{\mathbf v}\) \(\newcommand{\wvec}{\mathbf w}\) \(\newcommand{\xvec}{\mathbf x}\) \(\newcommand{\yvec}{\mathbf y}\) \(\newcommand{\zvec}{\mathbf z}\) \(\newcommand{\rvec}{\mathbf r}\) \(\newcommand{\mvec}{\mathbf m}\) \(\newcommand{\zerovec}{\mathbf 0}\) \(\newcommand{\onevec}{\mathbf 1}\) \(\newcommand{\real}{\mathbb R}\) \(\newcommand{\twovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\ctwovec}[2]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\threevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cthreevec}[3]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfourvec}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\fivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{r}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\cfivevec}[5]{\left[\begin{array}{c}#1 \\ #2 \\ #3 \\ #4 \\ #5 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\mattwo}[4]{\left[\begin{array}{rr}#1 \amp #2 \\ #3 \amp #4 \\ \end{array}\right]}\) \(\newcommand{\laspan}[1]{\text{Span}\{#1\}}\) \(\newcommand{\bcal}{\cal B}\) \(\newcommand{\ccal}{\cal C}\) \(\newcommand{\scal}{\cal S}\) \(\newcommand{\wcal}{\cal W}\) \(\newcommand{\ecal}{\cal E}\) \(\newcommand{\coords}[2]{\left\{#1\right\}_{#2}}\) \(\newcommand{\gray}[1]{\color{gray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\lgray}[1]{\color{lightgray}{#1}}\) \(\newcommand{\rank}{\operatorname{rank}}\) \(\newcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\col}{\text{Col}}\) \(\renewcommand{\row}{\text{Row}}\) \(\newcommand{\nul}{\text{Nul}}\) \(\newcommand{\var}{\text{Var}}\) \(\newcommand{\corr}{\text{corr}}\) \(\newcommand{\len}[1]{\left|#1\right|}\) \(\newcommand{\bbar}{\overline{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bhat}{\widehat{\bvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\bperp}{\bvec^\perp}\) \(\newcommand{\xhat}{\widehat{\xvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\vhat}{\widehat{\vvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\uhat}{\widehat{\uvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\what}{\widehat{\wvec}}\) \(\newcommand{\Sighat}{\widehat{\Sigma}}\) \(\newcommand{\lt}{<}\) \(\newcommand{\gt}{>}\) \(\newcommand{\amp}{&}\) \(\definecolor{fillinmathshade}{gray}{0.9}\)- Define bilingualism.
- Explain the concept of cumulative vocabulary.
- Identify cognitive, academic, and social benefits associated with bilingualism.
- Compare common models of bilingual education and their goals.
- Discuss how language connects to culture and identity in bilingual children.
Bilingualism and Bilingual Education
Although monolingual speakers—those who speak only one language—often do not realize it, the majority of children around the world are bilingual. These children understand and use two languages across different contexts (Meyers-Sutton, 2005). Even in the United States, which has historically been a relatively monolingual society, more than 47 million people speak a language other than English at home. Of these, approximately 10 million are children and youth enrolled in public schools (United States Department of Commerce, 2003). While the majority of bilingual students in the U.S. are Hispanic, more than a hundred different languages are spoken by children in classrooms across the country.
In these diverse communities, it is increasingly common for a single classroom to include students from multiple language backgrounds. Bilingualism exists in various forms and degrees, and understanding this diversity is crucial for supporting equitable and inclusive learning environments.
Understanding Bilingualism
Types of Bilingualism
Not all bilingual children develop their language skills in the same way. Researchers often distinguish between:
- Simultaneous bilinguals: Children who learn two languages from birth or early infancy.
- Sequential bilinguals: Children who learn a second language after the first language is well established.
Children also vary in language dominance. Some are equally fluent in both languages (balanced bilinguals), while others may be stronger in one language, depending on exposure and use at home, school, or in the community.
Cumulative Vocabulary
Bilingual children may seem to have smaller vocabularies in each individual language compared to monolingual peers. However, this does not mean they are behind. When both languages are considered together, their total or cumulative vocabulary is often equal to or greater than that of monolingual children (Pearson, Fernández, & Oller, 1993). For example, a bilingual child may know household-related words in Spanish and school-related words in English. These language-specific vocabularies reflect the environments in which each language is used.
Recognizing cumulative vocabulary is essential in educational settings. Without this understanding, bilingual children may be misidentified as having language delays. Educators and specialists should assess vocabulary across both languages to gain a more accurate picture of a child’s language development (Bedore, Peña, Garcia, & Cortez, 2005).
Benefits of Bilingualism
Bilingualism provides significant cognitive, academic, and social advantages. Fluent bilingual individuals often have stronger executive functioning skills, such as working memory, cognitive flexibility, and attentional control (Bialystok, 2001). These abilities support problem-solving, multitasking, and creative thinking.
Bilingual children also demonstrate greater metalinguistic awareness, or an understanding of how language works (Jimenez, Garcia, & Pearson, 1995). This means they can more easily understand concepts like word meaning, grammar, and language differences.
Furthermore, a strong foundation in a first language (L1) can support second language (L2) learning, especially when children transfer skills like vocabulary and storytelling across languages (Hansen, Umeda, & McKinney, 2002).
Bilingual Education Approaches
Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\). Three children tinker with small objects. Image by Bakken Museum via Minneapolis2040 is licensed CC BY-SA 2.0.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to educating bilingual children. Schools in the United States implement various instructional models depending on the needs of their students, resources, and community demographics. Five common approaches include:
-
Immersion Programs
In immersion settings, instruction is provided entirely in English, with the goal of rapid second language acquisition. These programs do not use the child’s home language, which can be difficult for students who lack English proficiency and support in maintaining their first language. -
ESL Pull-Out Programs
In ESL (English as a Second Language) pull-out programs, students leave the general education classroom for part of the day to receive specialized English instruction. While this model helps with English development, it may not support continued growth in the home language or content learning in the mainstream classroom. -
Transitional Bilingual Education
Transitional programs begin with instruction in the student’s home language and gradually shift to English. The goal is to transition students to English-only classrooms while using the home language as a bridge. These programs focus on English acquisition rather than long-term bilingualism. -
Developmental Bilingual Education
Also known as maintenance bilingual education, this approach promotes long-term development of both the home language and English. Instruction occurs in both languages over several years, supporting biliteracy and cultural identity. -
Two-Way Immersion Programs
Two-way immersion (or dual-language immersion) programs bring together native English speakers and speakers of another language in one classroom. Instruction is split between the two languages, and all students are expected to become bilingual and biliterate. These programs have been shown to support high academic achievement and foster respect for linguistic and cultural diversity.
Effective bilingual education models share key features: they are culturally inclusive, linguistically supportive, and implemented by trained educators who value students' diverse backgrounds.
Culture, Identity, and Language
Language is more than a communication tool—it is deeply connected to a child’s identity, relationships, and worldview. For bilingual children, their heritage language often serves as a vital link to family and cultural traditions.
Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\). Children who are encouraged to use and develop their family's native language tend to have higher self-esteem and cultural pride. Image by Province of British Columbia is licensed CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
Maintaining the home language supports strong family connections and a positive self-concept. Research shows that children who are encouraged to use and develop both languages tend to show higher self-esteem and cultural pride (Krogstad & Gonzalez-Barrera, 2015). In contrast, when a child’s home language is discouraged, they may feel pressured to suppress part of who they are, which can lead to confusion about identity and a sense of exclusion.
Educational practices that respect and promote bilingualism affirm children’s identities and foster environments where all students feel seen, valued, and included.
References, Contributors and Attributions
Bedore, L. M., Peña, E. D., Garcia, M., & Cortez, C. (2005). Conceptual versus monolingual scoring: When does it make a difference? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 36(3), 188–200. https://doi.org/10.1044/0161-1461(2005/020)
Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Hansen, L., Umeda, C., & McKinney, M. (2002). Predicting bilingual children’s vocabulary learning: The role of first-language vocabulary size and other factors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 81–91. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.1.81
Jimenez, R. T., Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1995). Three children, two languages, and strategic reading: Case studies in bilingual/monolingual reading. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 67–97. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032001067
Krogstad, J. M., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2015). A majority of English-speaking Hispanics in the U.S. are bilingual. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-re...are-bilingual/
Meyers-Sutton, S. (2005). Language development and bilingualism. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (2nd ed., pp. 299–311). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pearson, B. Z., Fernández, S. C., & Oller, D. K. (1993). Lexical development in bilingual infants and toddlers: Comparison to monolingual norms. Language Learning, 43(1), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1993.tb00174.x
United States Department of Commerce. (2003). Language use and English-speaking ability: 2000. U.S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/c2kbr-29.pdf