District of Columbia Public Schools

The District of Columbia Public Schools is an urban school system serving roughly 46,000 students. Eleven schools in this school system offer students the opportunity to learn grade-level content while also acquiring a second language by enrolling in their dual-language program. The dual-language program is an educational program that seeks to make students bilingual and bi-literate while achieving high academic competency and acquiring cultural competency. This school district has received a surge of interest in their dual-language program from parents and other stakeholders; therefore, this is the best time to study and evaluate the short-term and long-term effectiveness of the program in meeting local bilingual policies, the effectiveness of the curriculum and implementation and overall student achievement and language development.

This paper will provide information on the approach that will be utilized during this program evaluation, as well as, provide a rationale for the chosen approach. This paper will also describe and develop three major focus areas, as well as, provide a rationale for choosing these three focus areas lastly this paper will seek to describe the stakeholders for the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public School system.

Planned Approach

There are many different approaches that one can consider for this program evaluation; however, due to the nature of the and has andAre their increased dual-language dual-language program, the approach that will be utilized for this evaluation is the participant-oriented approach. The participant-oriented approach allows evaluators to partner up and collaborate with the various stakeholders before, during, and after the program evaluation.

Get quality help now

Prof. Finch

Verified

Proficient in: Bilingual Education

4.7 (346)

“ This writer never make an mistake for me always deliver long before due date. Am telling you man this writer is absolutely the best. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This approach greatly differs from the expertise-oriented approach in that it does not rely solely on the expertise or professional opinion of the evaluators, but it also includes the experiences of the various stakeholders. This approach will ensure that the various stakeholders in this program are both considered and represented in the evaluation. Additionally, the evaluator in this approach will act as a facilitator and thought partner for the stakeholders by assisting bi-literate in coming to agreements, as well as, assisting the stakeholders to make and implement action plans. Guba and Lincoln developed this approach with the hopes of representing “…the multiple realities seen by stakeholders…” (Fitzpatrick et al., p. 198, 2010). They stated that allowing stakeholders to take participate in the evaluation process gives the stakeholders a sense of ownership which in turn makes them more committed to the process both pre and post the evaluation.

Rationale and Support of Approach

The rationale for the participant-oriented approach being utilized for this evaluation plan is because within this approach there is the practical participative approach which further supports the participation of the various stakeholders in the evaluation. The practical participative approach helps to increas,e the chances that the results and findings of this evaluation will be utilized to make decisions on the progress and continuation, specifically, in terms of the growth, adjustments, and alterations of the dual-language, program in the District of Columbia Public School system. As mentioned before, the unique idea behind this approach is that stakeholders support the evaluators before, during and after the evaluation in such an impactful way that they often feel a sense of pride and ownership, as well as, gain a better understanding of the program. The study, “But I’m a Language Teacher! Dual Immersion Teacher Identities in a Complex Policy Context” allowed teachers to actively participate in the policy research of their dual language program by exploring their “…roles and identities in the complex policy environment of a school…” (Chestnut, p. 339, 2015). The teachers in this study participated in policy research focused on their work as dual immersion instructors and as professional learning community (PLC) collaborators. The researchers found that dual immersion teachers often feel that they do not have much of a voice in the decision-making process in terms of the work they must engage in during their PLCs, as well as, they are not able to make decisions on the structure of the dual immersion program. Educators that participated in this study felt that the work they collaborated in during the professional learning community oftentimes conflicted with their beliefs and identities. This study demonstrates that there is a need for a more participant-oriented approach because it will allow teachers, who are stakeholders, to play an active role in the decision-making process during this evaluation. The study, “Are They All Language Learners? Educational Labeling and Raciolinguistic Identifying in a California Middle School Dual Language Program” draws on the experience of Mexican immigrant families in a California middle school dual-language program.

The study examined the experiences of Mexican immigrant families whose children were enrolled in the dual-language program at Cooper Academy, which is a middle school in northern California. Researchers collected interviews to determine if perhaps “…the political landscape and sociolinguistic ideologies…” (Hernandez, p. 133, 2017) affected the school’s effort to implement a bilingual program that was equitable for all students. The results from this study indicate that students and families that are Spanish-dominant and who participate in the dual language program do in fact experience a form of inequality. Furthermore, they found that their efforts (the efforts of Copper Academy) of creating a learning space that is “color-blind” through sociolinguistic ideology, actually supports and further enriches and promotes dominant families in that it does not give students the same learning opportunities because it allows dominant families the choice to provide enrichment for their children, while the Mexican immigrant families were not afforded this same privilege. The article states, that the school failed “…to acknowledge the deep divide between the process of subtractive schooling involved in learning English (a legitimate language) and the process of “choosing” to learn Spanish…” (Hernandez, p. 146, 2017).

This study supports the use of the participant-oriented approach for this program evaluation because it demonstrates the needed experiences of parents, students, and family in the evaluation. Additionally, this will prove useful for the evaluation because it will assist the school in determining how best to serve the needs of the families in their school district, especially those whose voices are usually not heard and are usually underrepresented. Lastly, the article, “Misinterpreting School Reform: The Dissolution of a Dual-Immersion Bilingual Program in an Urban New England Elementary School” analyzes the bilingual-education local policy of Connecticut. This study specifically looked at a large urban elementary school in the area astheas the dual part of their ongoing case study on the dissolution of a dual-language immersion program. Researchers examined the relationship of the bilingual-education policies in Connecticut with the language-education policies of the school and found that there were significant areas of disconnect between the local and state policies. In 2008, the elementary school in this study had to decide whether to go into reconstitution or adopt a state-approved school reform model because the school was not able to meet its Annual Yearly Progress Standards after more than five years. The teachers at the school opted for the school reform model. However, since the adaptation of the school reform model language education at this school has taken “a back seat” in that the school had shifted “away from the dual-immersion model as a shift away from bilingual education altogether” (Warhol & Mayer, p. 152, 2012). This, in turn, affected the services that students could receive under the bilingual and language policies of the state.

This article supports the participant-oriented approach because it allows for experts in this field to measure and evaluate the dual language while providing clear information regarding bilingual policy and potential benefits that students can attain when a dual language program is implemented correctly, in this case, it can potentially present information on how to implement the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public Schools effectively. Three Major Areas Evaluation questions help to ensure that the program evaluation is moving towards the overall goal of the evaluation. Therefore, three major areas that will be examined in this program evaluation are policies and funding, implementation of curriculum, and overall student academic achievement in terms of language and content. These areas will be the focus of this program evaluation because they will help determine whether or not this program should continue as it is currently running, or should be altered and modified. Additionally, these three areas will be examined because theydual-language will help to determine the strengths and challenges of the dual language program in this school district. The first major area will examine the local bilingual-education policy by answering the essential questions; are local and state policies on bilingual education being met through the dual languageduallanguage dual-lanlanguageasthmasplan language languageguagelanguage dual program in the District of Columbia? Is there sufficient funding allocated so that the program is functioning as efficiently as it should?

Additionally, this major area will answer the following questions: How are local policies surrounding bilingual education supporting the success of the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public School system? Who is ensuring that the local bilingual-education policies comply with the dual language program in this school district? What role does the funding of the dual language program play in ensuring that the local bilingual-education policies are being met? The next major area will seek to evaluate the overall implementation of the dual language program in this school district through the essential question, how are schools and teachers implementing the dual languagedual-language program in the District of Columbia Public Schools? Additionally, the following three questions will be posed to ensure that this focus area tends to the needs of the teachers and other stakeholders involved in the implementation and fidelity of the program. How is the curriculum of the school district increasing biliteracy and bilingualism in the students participating in the program? What professional development opportunities and training are available to ensure teachers in the dual language program are highly equipped tArethereteach? And Arethere theredualthere dual-language sufficient resources and support for teachers who participate in the dual-language program? Lastly, the last major area will focus on the students, are students achieving academic success through participation in the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public Schools? Additionally, this major area will investigate the academic strengths and challenges of the dual language program by focusing on student outcomes dual duals language language language language language dual-language. Furthermore, the following questions will be answered: are all students given the opportunity to participate in the dual language program? Are the specific learning needs of students still being met in the dual-languagedual-language program? Are students mastering grade-level content and standards while participating in the dual language program?

Rationale and Support for the Major Areas

These areas were identified as the major focus areas because of the existing literature that is currently available on dual languagedualdual-languagelanguage dual-language programs. The existing literature helps describe the potential attributes that can be utilized and considered as “indicators” of the successful and unsuccessful implemental-language dual-language dual-language programs. For example, the researchers of the article, “Misinterpreting School Reform: The Dissolution of a Dual-Immersion Bilingual Program in an Urban New England Elementary School” stated that many students that were enrolled in the bilingual/dual language program were underperforming tests test dualprincdual school mandates schoolandated testsdual-language because the implementation of the dual language program was poor, they mentioned how “One veteran bilingual teacher related that the school faculty had never received any professional development on how to implement the dual-immersion program…” (Warhol & Mayer, p. 155 2012). This helps support the major areas of principal policy and funding and curriculum and implementation of the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public Schools. Additionally, it is important to remember that an effective dual language program is one that has a balance of English-dominant speakers and Spanish-dominant speakers in the same classroom; however, the study “Race, Power, and Equity in a Multiethnic Urban Elementary School with a Dual-Language “Strand” Program” demonstrated two very interesting items: one, there are not many African American students who participate in the program “…appears to exclude African American children” (Palmer, p. 95, 2010) and two, there is an imbalance in the number of Latino and Spanish speaking students who are participating in the program because of “…the number of spots available to those children in favor of mostly white, middle-class, English-speaking students…” (Palmer, p. 95, 2010).

This closely supports the major area onhasof student achievement in the dual-language program in the District of Columbia Public School system. Stakeholders There are, a wide variety of stakeholder groups for the dual language program in this school district. First, there are the decision authority stakeholders. This group is made up of policymakers in the district, such as the chancellor and deputy chancellor. Also, in this group are organizations and people who fund the school system, such as the mayor, as well as the board of principalsschool andhasand has, the office of education. Then there is the direct responsibility of the program stakeholders. This group is made up of the dual-language principals superintendent, the principal, and the assistant principals, that oversee this program in their school, Dual-Languages, teachers, and the office of language acquisition in the District of Columbia Public Schools. Lastly, there are the intended beneficiaries’ stakeholders. This group is made up of students, families, and communities. Each group of stakeholders is important to the overall implementation of the dual language program in this school district.

Additionally, the stakeholders are important to this evaluation because of the approach that will be utilized to carry out the evaluation. Conclusion Overall, the use of the participant-oriented approach allows stakeholders to have a sense of ease going into the evaluation because they become active partners/members, as well as, shareholders in the evaluation process. dual-language using the experiences and knowledge of the various stakeholders in this program evaluation increases the validity and reliability of the evaluation, as well as, increases the likelihood that the results from the evaluation will be used to further the dual-Language language program in the District of Columbia Public Schools. The three major focus areas will ensure that the evaluation is structured in a way that will determine its current effectiveness and will assist in making decisions about the program so that it can operate at its full potential.

References

1. Chestnut, C. (2015). “But I’m a Language Teacher!” Dual Immersion Teacher Identities in a Complex Policy Context. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 27(4), 339-362.
2. Fitzpatrick, Jody L., James Sanders, Blaine Worthen. Program Evaluation: Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines, 4th Edition. Pearson Learning Solutions, 09/2010. [Strayer University Bookshelf].
3. Hernandez, S. J. (2017). Are They All Language Learners? Educational Labeling and Raciolinguistic Identifying in a California Middle School Dual Language Program. CATESOL Journal, 29(1), 133-154.
4. Palmer, D. (2010). Race, Power, and Equity in a Multiethnic Urban Elementary School with schools, “Strand” Program. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 41(1), 94-114.
5. Warhol, L., & Mayer, A. (2012). Misinterpreting School Reform: The Dissolution of a Dual- Immersion Bilingual Program in an Urban New England Elementary School. Bilingual Research Journal, 35(2), 145- 163.