EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
1
Written by Socorro G. Herrera, Ed.D., Martha I. Martinez, Ph.D., Laurie Olsen, Ph.D., and Sonia Soltero, Ph.D.
National Committee for Eective Literacy for Emergent Bilingual Students
DECEMBER 2022
Early Literacy Development and Instruction for
Dual Language Learners in Early Childhood Education
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
2
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 3
A Note on Terminology ................................................................................................................................................ 3
Literacy Development for Dual Language Learners ..................................................................................................4
SECTION 1
Building Shared Understanding: Connections Between Language, Culture, and Literacy ................................... 6
The Harmful Consequences of Home Language Loss ............................................................................................... 7
Examining the Messages of the School and Classroom .............................................................................................7
SECTION 2
The Dangers of a Narrowed Approach to Early Learning and Early Literacy ......................................................... 8
Kindergarten Readiness ................................................................................................................................................ 8
An English-Centric View of Literacy ......................................................................................................................... 9
SECTION 3
Research-Based Practices For Dual Language Learners’ Literacy Development .................................................11
Early Literacy Programs and Approaches for Dual Language Learners ..................................................................11
Eective Early Literacy Skills Development for Dual Language Learners .............................................................13
Important Conditions for Literacy Development ..................................................................................................... 16
Toward a Comprehensive and Eective Early Literacy Approach for Dual Language Learners ..........................18
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ........................................................................................19
Critical Recommendations for Dual Language Learner Education ........................................................................ 20
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 22
ENDNOTES ............................................................................................................................................................23
ABOUT THE AUTHORS ....................................................................................................................................24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The National Committee for Eective Literacy ©2022
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
3
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this paper is to inform early childhood practitioners, educational leaders, curriculum developers, and
policymakers about literacy development and eective literacy instruction for young, developing bilingual children
who are learning English as a new language
1
in early childhood classrooms. These emergent bilingual children are often
referred to as dual language learners (DLLs), the term used in this paper. According to the Migration Policy Institute
(2021), these approximately 7.4 million emerging bilingual children make up roughly 33% of all children under age six
in the United States. Over 80% of dual language learners are children of color, and about 60% come from a home
where Spanish is spoken. Given the critical mass of this growing population and the significant role that early childhood
education (ECE) plays in the children’s future academic success, stakeholders at every level will benefit from
understanding the research base about DLL’s linguistic and cultural assets and their unique linguistic and sociocultural
needs. Pivotal to educators’ eectiveness with young dual language learners is the accompanying professional learning
in evidence-based instructional practices that best match those needs.
“Dual Language learners” is the chosen term in the
early childhood education world, used to refer to
children birth to five who are learning two+ languages
simultaneously or learning a second language while
also still developing their home language.
“English Learners” (ELs) or English Language
Learners (ELLs) is the term used in the K-12 public
schooling system for students with a home language
other than English and whose English is not yet
proficient enough to comprehend, access and succeed
in an English taught schooling system. It is based in
civil rights law guaranteeing equal educational access
and the right to services and supports to overcome the
English language barrier.
In addition to these two terms, there are distinctions
made based on the pathway to becoming bilingual,
and the type of bilingualism. Bilingualism is typically
defined in simple terms: the ability to communicate in
two or more languages. The reality is that bilingualism
is much more nuanced and complex, and there are
a variety of contexts and profiles related to how
individuals develop their languages, levels, and types of
proficiency in each language.
Simultaneous bilinguals grow up using two languages
from birth. By contrast, sequential bilinguals first
develop their mother tongue and later learn a second
language, usually at school.
Circumstantial bilinguals usually come from
minoritized language groups that acquire their second
language in order to participate in the majority
community. Society tends to devalue their first
language, resulting in a shift to monolingualism in the
dominant language within one or two generations.
On the other hand, elective bilinguals choose to
become bilingual to enhance their social, economic
or educational opportunities. They tend to become
biliterate and are valued by society.
Receptive bilinguals can understand the less dominant
language but do not speak, read or write it well or at
all. This often happens with children and grandchildren
of heritage language speakers. Expressive bilinguals,
by contrast, can speak both languages but do not
necessarily read or write both.
Biliterates can read and write both languages, and
typically have formal academic language skills.
Bilinguals speak and understand but have not
developed reading and writing skills in both languages.
A NOTE ON TERMINOLOGY
There are multiple terms used throughout the nation to refer to children who are developing two languages. Because
the research base includes studies that refer to one or another of the terms, it is important to clarify them here.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
4
Current literacy development trends that claim to
represent the “science of reading” (but actually focus
on only a few narrow aspects of literacy) are a serious
cause of concern among researchers, practitioners
and teacher educators (Gonzalez & Miller, 2020).
Rather than representing the full comprehensive
set of literacy skills that the science of reading has
identified, these eorts frame literacy development
and literacy instruction from an English-centric
standpoint that is based largely on the research with
monolingual English speakers. It further narrows
literacy development and literacy instruction to
just English reading, frequently hyper-focusing on
phonics instruction. This neither represents the actual
science and research on reading, nor adequately
speaks to literacy development for Dual Language
Learners. This approach ignores the multilingual
realities and literacy needs of English learners in K-12
settings and the early literacy needs of dual language
learners in early childhood settings. The importance
of culturally responsive pedagogy is also largely
absent from the science of reading discussions. A
reductionist literacy orientation overly focused on
discrete reading skills in early childhood classrooms
at the cost of more well-rounded, developmentally
appropriate, and culturally and linguistically
responsive practices is a misguided approach for all
children, especially for dual language learners.
Direct narrow instruction of discrete literacy and
math skills is already dominating kindergarten
classrooms at the expense of meaningful and
developmentally important play-based instruction
(Bassok, Lathom & Roren, 2016; Miller & Almon,
2009). With increasing calls to measure kindergarten
readiness with English-only early literacy and
math assessments (REL Northwest, 2016), there
is danger that the current primary grades direct
instruction approach will seep into the preschool
context. This danger is particularly concerning given
early childhood education’s critical role in building
young children’s early language and literacy skills,
including the multilingual and multiliteracy skills of
dual language learners. When ECE supports cultural
connections and home language development,
it positively impacts dual language learners' later
school success [National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine, 2017]. When these
supports do not exist, dual language learners suer
home language loss, which not only denies them
the cognitive and economic benefits of bilingualism
but can have negative impacts on later literacy
development, healthy identity development, and a
stronger connection to family members (Anderson,
2012; Duran et al., 2013; Hammer et al., 2014;
Wong-Fillmore, 1991; 2000).
Unfortunately, misconceptions about bilingualism
and acquiring English as a new language abound.
The most prevalent of these is that young children
“pick up” a new language very quickly, that more
English is better, and that bilingualism confuses
children leading them to develop weak skills in both
their languages (Soltero, 2011). Research findings
over the past six decades refute these ‘myths’ by
demonstrating the cognitive, academic, socio-
emotional, and economic benefits of bilingualism
and biliteracy and of developing children’s home
languages as an eective bridge to the new language
(Callahan & Gándara, 2014; Grosjean, 2021;
Lindholm-Leary, 2016; Krizman, Shook, Skoe, &
Kraus, 2012). Neuroscientists and psycholinguists
point to the positive eects of learning two
languages during the infant-toddler years and also to
the human brain’s overall capacity to learn multiple
languages. In addition, young children learning two
languages have more neural activity in the parts of
the brain associated with language processing than
monolingual children (Bialystok, 2011; Bialystok,
Craik, & Luk, 2012).
Becoming literate is a key goal of formal schooling
not only because it is fundamental to further
academic learning, but, more importantly, for the
power literacy provides each of us to function in a
literate society. Literacy positions learners both to be
influenced by (through reading) and to be influencers
for (through writing) individuals beyond their
Literacy Development for
Dual Language Learners
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
5
immediate context. Dual language learners have the capacity to become good readers, writers, leaders, and
informed citizens in two or more languages. However, they need eective, research-based, developmentally
appropriate literacy instruction that is culturally and linguistically responsive to realize this potential. This
paper was created to inform eective early literacy instruction for dual language learners and is organized in
four sections:
SECTION
Building Shared Understanding: Connections Between Language, Culture, and Literacy.
Explains the nature of bilingualism and early literacy development for dual language learners, the
harmful eects of language loss, and appropriate pathways for linguistic and culturally responsive
literacy development.
SECTION
The Dangers of a Narrowed Approach to Early Learning and Early Literacy.
Explains the dangers of narrow approaches to dual language learners’ early learning and early literacy,
the impact of Kindergarten Readiness on policies and practices, and how an English-centric view of
literacy for dual language learners does not serve their bilingual and English language development
needs.
SECTION
Research-Based Practices for Dual Language Learners’ Literacy Development.
Explains the importance of and connection between English language acquisition and the bilingual
brain, and the inextricable link between language development and literacy development. It also
describes the essential components of eective early literacy instruction for dual language learners,
the conditions needed to facilitate their engagement and deep learning, and examples of what
eective practices look like in bilingual classrooms in comparison to those primarily taught in English.
SECTION
Conclusions and Recommendations.
Provides a set of recommendations that can guide ECE teachers, literacy coaches, school leaders,
district administrators, and policymakers in adopting best practices for dual language learners based
on the growing body of research on bilingualism and early literacy development specifically for dual
language learners.
Throughout this paper the authors reference the recent paper published by the National Committee for
Eective Literacy, Toward Comprehensive Eective Literacy Policy and Instruction for English Learner/
Emergent Bilingual Students (Escamilla et al., 2022) to contextualize the larger debate over the
“science of reading.”
1
2
3
4
6
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
1
SECTION
Building Shared Understanding:
Connections Between Language, Culture, and Literacy
Regardless of socio-economic level, country of origin, or language(s) spoken in the home, all families bring
assets that can be leveraged to support reading instruction. Funds of knowledge (Moll et al., 1992) represent
the wealth of knowledge and resources accumulated from life in the home that children possess when they
arrive in ECE programs. These funds of knowledge are embodied in children’s and families’ languages and are
represented through their beliefs, values, internalized rules, and expectations. Each child brings with them the
accumulated and historically developed body of knowledge that is critical to their wellbeing and their cultural
and linguistic identity.
Language is fundamental to how children develop relationships with others and how they understand their
role in the home, community, and larger society. For dual language learners who are developing two (or
more) languages, this plurality of languages provides a multi-textured way of viewing, understanding, and
interacting in and with the world. Castro & Franco (2021) emphasize, “Bilingualism goes beyond being able
to use two languages. It defines children’s identity and the way they see and interpret the world around them”
(p. 76). Literacy development is nested within this larger picture of first and second language acquisition and
use. Children’s oral language practice and development in both languages is foundational to their literacy
development. Children build on their expanding oral language capacities through interactions with others in
their homes, communities, and school.
Families engage in literacy practices in the home that are culture and language bound. Reading and writing
activities undertaken in the course of daily events reflect the multifaceted identities of family members.
They are influenced by heritage and community cultures and home-specific practices. Families incorporate
activities such as oral storytelling, reading books, and creating or using other print materials (e.g., recipes,
reminder notes, grocery lists, song lyrics, religious devotionals, social media, texts, emails, medical information,
instructional manuals, and school communication). For dual language learners, this typically happens in their
home language, and in some cases, simultaneously with English. When children arrive in ECE programs, they
bring years of language-building experience, knowledge anchored in one or more languages, and early literacy
practices that allow them to engage meaningfully with others in their home and community. These linguistic
strengths, however, too frequently are not recognized in school contexts. Young learners can develop pre-
literacy skills such as oral language, phonological and phonemic awareness, alphabet knowledge, and concepts
about print by building on what they already know (Sousa, 2017). These skills are modeled and developed in
homes through daily interactions with talk, music, and environmental print.
Early childhood education programs must not only be developmentally appropriate, but they should also
take into account learners’ bilingual and cultural ways of knowing. Through young children’s daily interactions
and experiences within their families and communities they organize concepts (schemas), enabling them
to connect new information to their existing knowledge beginning at birth. Literacy instruction that is
decontextualized and devoid of relevance to the learner’s home language, literacy, and life denies the
resources that each child brings with them to school. Worse still, literacy instruction that focuses primarily on
developing discrete skills in English has the potential to erase much more than surface-level literacy practices
of the home and community.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
7
The Harmful Consequences of Home Language Loss
Cultural assimilation and the dominance of English in the United States are strong forces that contribute
to a language shift from the home language to English. Anderson (2012) notes that home language loss
among Spanish speakers is influenced by many factors, including enrollment in English-only preschools, the
perception and reality that Spanish is somehow a lower-status language than English, which results in limited
opportunities in the schools, home, and communities to practice and develop Spanish.
When language shift and language loss occur, it is more than just the home language that is lost. Language loss
also includes loss of culture and family bonds and has a long-term impact on a child’s identity, socio-emotional
wellbeing, and academic success. According to Genesee, Paradis, & Crago (2011), “Erasing a child’s language
or cultural patterns of language use is a great loss for the child. Children’s identities and sense of self are
inextricably linked to the language they speak and the cultures into which they have been socialized. Even at
an early age, they are speakers of their languages and members of their cultures. Language and culture are
essential to children’s identities” (p. 33). These include their identities as literate learners. Therefore, literacy
development must be informed by their home literacy practices and encompass the child’s sociocultural,
linguistic, cognitive, and academic dimensions. (Herrera et al., 2015).
Lily Wong Fillmore’s (1991) seminal research with immigrant families documented the damaging disruption to
family dynamics when children are denied culturally and linguistically responsive schooling. Instruction that
furthers a monocultural and monolingual perspective on learning increases the potential of the child losing the
home language and the advantages of bilingualism for education and beyond, including literacy (Escamilla et
al., 2018; Montanari et al., 2016), cognition (Bialystock, 2001), high school persistence (Rumbaut, 2014),
matriculation to four-year colleges (Santibañez & Zárate, 2014), and family cohesion (Portes & Hao, 2002).
Examining the Messages of the School and Classroom
The NAEYC Principles of Child Development and Learning emphasize that early in life, children begin to
recognize how they and others who share or do not share their identities are treated (Alanís & Iruka, 2021).
Such developmental capacities provide an impetus for early childhood educators to reflect critically on the
following questions:
In what ways are school communications and interactions responsive to the multiliterate
and multilingual community served?
How are all of the child’s languages utilized as resources in the learning process?
In what ways are children supported to see learning as connected to their personal
interests, motivations, literacies, and life experiences?
How are the perspectives of caregivers and family members used to support a
strengths-based approach to learning and literacy?
In culturally and linguistically arming environments,young bilingual children use their individual ways of
knowing, being, interacting, and comprehending to fuel their ongoing learning in and through their languages.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
8
SECTION
The Dangers of a Narrowed Approach to Early Learning
and Early Literacy
Instructional methods adopted by schools can be detrimental to all children when they subscribe to a
narrowed, overly scripted curriculum focused on isolated, discrete skills. This approach is misaligned with
how young children learn and is devoid of response to the cultural and linguistic realities of dual language
learners. When these methods and associated assessments fail to consider the students’ cultural and linguistic
backgrounds, they can be particularly harmful to children of color and multilingual learners. Culture, like
language, is a lens through which learning occurs. A culturally and linguistically “agnostic” pedagogical
approach fails to acknowledge the dominant cultural and linguistic bias of the classroom. Such an approach
places children of color and multilingual learners at a disadvantage. It contributes to the deficit-framing of
their abilities and the achievement gaps that are explained away by this deficit-framing.
A related concern is the potential for an increased focus on teacher-directed learning and standardized
learning assessments in early childhood education classrooms. These practices are already the norm in
kindergarten. With the increased focus on kindergarten readiness, P-3 alignment, and a “reading crisis”
in schools (Durán & Hikida, 2022), preschool programs may face a similar fate as today’s kindergarten
classrooms.
There is growing recognition of the importance of early learning in closing achievement gaps and setting
children up for long-term success (Barnett & Frede, 2010; Gomez, 2016). For dual language learners
specifically, participation in high-quality and developmentally appropriate preschool programs/early childhood
education can improve their academic achievement (Barnett et al., 2006; Espinosa & Magruder, 2015). In
addition to focusing on early learning, there is increased attention to the preschool to third grade continuum.
Many states are calling for and funding P-3 initiatives to strengthen the transition from preschool to
kindergarten, and the alignment between the curriculum in early childhood education and early elementary
school grades.. While attention to curriculum alignment is welcome, there is a danger that the pedagogical
strengths of preschool supporting children’s healthy development and kindergarten readiness could be
dismissed by trying to ensure that all children—especially those from low-income backgrounds—will meet
narrowly defined, academically-specific kindergarten readiness benchmarks.
Kindergarten Readiness
While there is no common definition of “kindergarten readiness” in the U.S., most states have filled this void
with their own definitions of what this means. REL Northwest (2016) reported that 32 states either had a
definition in place or were in the process of adopting one. Definitions and goals statements that focus broadly
on important child development domains such as social and emotional development, cognitive development,
and physical wellbeing, for the most part, tend to be written in developmentally appropriate ways. However,
the concern is with those definitions that are overly academic and require children to demonstrate discrete
skills in specific academic content areas. For example, Arizona’s definition of kindergarten readiness expects
children to demonstrate early language, literacy, mathematics, and science development. Louisiana goes
further, expecting kindergarteners to show “cognitive abilities” in specific areas of early literacy (e.g.,
phonological awareness, print concepts, alphabetic understanding), basic numeracy (e.g., counting, number
awareness, spatial awareness), basic science (e.g., using appropriate science vocabulary), and social studies
2
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
9
An English-Centric View of Literacy
Besides an overemphasis on academic learning, directors of ECE programs should be wary of adopting
views of literacy development and literacy practices that treat multilingual learners and monolingual English
speakers the same. Dual language learners’ biliteracy development is stunted, their cultural and familial bonds
are weakened, and their long-term academic success can be undermined when literacy development becomes
synonymous with English literacy that is itself based primarily or exclusively on research with monolingual
English speakers. Too often, literacy instruction in U.S. schools is based on English literacy research and
designed for monolingual English speakers. As such, it ignores the bilingual reality in which dual language
learners live, how they learn, and how they acquire English as a new language. Current practices fail to
address their bilingual brains, including the symbiotic relationships between dual language development,
biliteracy development, and conceptual knowledge. “The degree to which the dual language brain is leveraged
or ignored spells a major dierence between eective and ineective/exclusionary literacy instruction” for
dual language learners (Escamilla et al., 2022, p. 7).
Eective literacy instruction and assessment for dual language learners should simultaneously address
language development and pre-literacy skill development across their languages. To implement this type
of bilingual instruction and assessment, early childhood educators need specialized training, expertise,
and appropriate assessments to monitor dual language learners’ biliteracy development and intervene
appropriately when development in either language is not progressing as it should. They and their colleagues
in the K-12 system also need adequate preparation to administer and interpret these kinds of assessments.
Too often, the literacy assessments used in elementary schools, like literacy instruction, are based on English
literacy development for English speakers. Thus, their use with dual language learners and English learners
can lead to erroneous interpretations of their linguistic development, ineective interventions, more English
instruction, and less bilingual language instruction or support.
(e.g., an awareness of money and time). Even though a state may have adopted a more general definition of
kindergarten readiness, students are often expected to demonstrate specific knowledge or skills when they
transition to kindergarten. By 2018, 41 states had begun implementing a Kindergarten Entry Assessment
(KEA), prompted in large part by the federal government’s 2011 Race to The Top: Early Learning Challenge
grant, which promoted the development and use of KEAs (Weisenfeld et al., 2020). More importantly, these
‘readiness’ expectations are typically English-centric with detrimental eects for dual language learners.
Rather than describing what children will begin to learn about and experience as they enter kindergarten,
these definitions consider “at-risk” any child that does not already demonstrate mastery of these academic
skills before entering kindergarten.
Kindergarten readiness definitions and KEAs become harmful to children when they define and assess
kindergarten readiness from an overly academic lens and when they contribute to kindergarten and preschool
learning environments that are developmentally inappropriate for young children. Both child-initiated and
teacher-guided play are essential to children’s healthy development, and should be central elements of
kindergarten classrooms and curricula. Unfortunately, play in kindergarten has increasingly been replaced
by direct instruction in literacy and math and time spent preparing for standardized testing (Bassok, Lathom
& Roren, 2016; Miller & Almon, 2009). In many respects, kindergarten has become the new first grade,
focusing more on academic content and standardized assessment and less on child-centered, imaginative
exploration and educational play. It is important to reemphasize the danger of pushing developmentally
inappropriate practices down into our preschool. An additional risk of kindergarten readiness definitions and
KEAs to dual language learners is when they reinforce an English-centric view of literacy.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
10
One particular area of concern related to the issue of assessment for dual language learners and young
English learners in both preschool and K-12 settings is the increasing use of a universal dyslexia screener. At
present, 38 states have adopted a dyslexia screener. Although not all states require these to be used with
all children, the calls for more dyslexia screening and screening that begins in preschool are becoming more
prominent (Rice & Gilsen, 2022). Proponents highlight how early identification can lead to early intervention
and prevent long term academic and social problems (Franchino, 2021; Sanfilippo et al., 2020). However,
dyslexia screeners and interventions in the U.S. tend to be based on English literacy development and normed
on monolingual English speakers (Caravolas, 2004; Sanfilippo et al., 2020). Furthermore, many education
practitioners do not have the specialized knowledge required to administer and interpret assessment results
for dual language learners and English learners. In general, education practitioners have had diculty
distinguishing between sociocultural/sociolinguistic factors (including language development) and disabilities,
which has prompted calls for specific training in this area (Park et al., 2012). This training should include how
to communicate with and collaborate with parents of linguistically diverse children about their children’s
early literacy development and the potential need for any screening, as well as how to communicate about
the screening results. Unless educators receive this training, have access to appropriate screeners, deeply
understand language and literacy development trajectories for dual language learners, know how to collaborate
with parents of linguistically diverse children, and can respond with interventions that are appropriate for
students who are learning English not just how to read in English, the use of universal dyslexia screeners with
dual language learners may lead to inappropriate designation of risk.
Dual language learners and their K-12 English learners counterparts need eective and appropriate
assessment and instruction. Lacking this, they risk becoming long-term English learners who suer diminished
opportunities to learn and fall so far behind their English-speaking peers that it is dicult for them to catch
up and graduate high school (Callahan, 2013; Olsen, 2010). Literacy assessments that are based on bilingual
children are desperately needed to promote eective literacy instruction for dual language learners and
English learners. In addition, greater use of bilingual and biliteracy assessment approaches would go a long
way in helping practitioners in ECE programs identify and support young dual language learners who may be
experiencing challenges. However, assessments alone are insucient. Educators at all system levels also need
bilingual/biliteracy assessment training; and, most importantly, they need to use an assets-based instructional
approach for multilingual children that builds on their linguistic and cultural resources. For decades, the early
childhood education field has recognized the importance of arming home language and culture, and, where
possible, incorporating bilingual instruction. Early childhood educators should build on this assets-based
approach and not abandon it for a narrowed, overly didactic, English-centric approach to literacy instruction
that does not serve the needs of the growing dual language learner population.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
11
Early Literacy Programs and Approaches for Dual Language Learners
Young children encounter text and messages about the purposes of text in their homes and community before
they ever arrive in a classroom through signs in the community, cereal boxes on the table, and the literacy
practices they observe at home, in church, among siblings, and so forth. Their more formal introduction and
socialization to literacy as part of schooling occurs in the context of the curriculum, instruction, and learning
environment of the ECE classroom. Eective early language and literacy development for dual language
learners is fostered through planned language approaches—sometimes called program models—that define
how a child’s two languages should be accommodated and developed.
Dual language learners in ECE programs are enrolled in one of three types of educational settings:
Bilingual Education including dual language education one-way or two-way programs.
Programs in English with ESL and home language support.
General education programs in English that have no specialized instruction (ESL) or other language
supports (not considered a supportive or appropriate approach for dual language learners”).
Dual language learners are developing language as an overall capacity, and are absorbing and internalizing the
specific structures, rhythms, sounds, and vocabulary that comprise the language systems of two (or more)
specific languages.
The programs that have the most long-lasting eectiveness for dual language learners are those that use the
home language for instruction (bilingual and dual language education) or, at the very minimum, provide home
language support and and ESL (English as a Second Language) instruction (Arias & Fee, 2018: Genesee,
2018; Lindholm-Leary, 2016; Mehisto & Genesee, 2015; Soltero, 2016; 2011).
SECTION
Research-Based Practices For Dual Language
Learners’ Literacy Development
Dual language reality must be understood and responded to in early literacy development, or language loss and
language interruption occur. Literacy development may be delayed or even stunted. Head Start’s Program
Performance Standards explicitly acknowledge that supporting dual language learners’ healthy development
and their learning outcomes requires that “bilingualism and biliteracy [are recognized] as strengths and [that
teachers] implement research-based practices that support their development” (U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, n.d.). Eective early language and literacy development approaches for young dual
language learners must be built on a research base that combines all of the following:
Knowledge about early childhood development, including how young children
learn and develop language overall.
Understanding what constitutes developmentally appropriate early literacy
instruction and the precursor skills to literacy.
Specific knowledge about literacy and the bilingual brain, second language
acquisition and multilingual learners.
3
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
12
Bilingual/Dual Language Education
Bilingual/Dual Language programs serve children who
primarily speak the same home language and implement
a bilingual education approach that focuses on language
and early literacy development in both the home
language and English. Bilingual/Dual Language programs
include explicit language and literacy objectives in
the student’s home language and English as a new
language. In addition, these programs include a clear
and systematic allocation of instructional time for each
language, as well as strategic alignment of early literacy
curriculum and instruction in the two languages. ECE
educators and support sta in eective Bilingual/Dual
Language programs can provide high-quality interaction
and instruction across all learning domains in both the
home language and English.
Linguistically and culturally authentic instructional
materials of high quality are available in both languages,
and adequate time is devoted to each language to
promote bilingualism and early biliteracy. While
programs dier in the specific allocation of time for each
language, research strongly points to having a minimum
of 50% of the time in the home language (Barnett
et al., 2007; Lindholm-Leary, 2014; 2016; Paez et
al., 2007). Rich oral language is emphasized in both
languages. Consistent research shows that teaching
children early literacy in the home language (where
they have the strongest linguistic and oral language
base) supports their literacy development in English
and confers cognitive, academic, and social benefits of
bilingualism. Families are also encouraged to use the
home language in home-based literacy activities and
are supported in doing so. Books with and without audio
are made available in the home languages. Especially
these days, multiple strategies can be employed to read
to children, talk about books, and dictate/write in their
home language.
English Language Programs with Home
Language Support and ESL
These are ECE programs where English is the medium
of instruction, but this is supplemented with home
language support and ESL instruction. This approach
is advisable in cases where bilingual education teachers
and sta are not available or where multiple languages
are represented among the children in the classroom.
English language development (also known as English as
a Second Language or ESL) instruction scaolds the
acquisition of English, supports dual language learners’
comprehension and participation in the new language,
and leverages and bolsters children’s strengths in the
home language as they engage in developing English.
While interactions and instruction are primarily in
English, eective practices in these settings include
strong armation and intentionality regarding the
promotion and utilization of the home language as well.
Similar to bilingual/dual language ECE programs,
families with children in non-bilingual ECE programs
are supported in their eorts to engage with their
children in home literacy practices and are given similar
instructional supports in the families’ home languages
to foster opportunities for children to be read to, talk
about books, and dictate/write in their home language.
In addition, parent and community volunteers and
bilingual instructional assistants engage children
in reading books and interactions in their home
languages, including in rhymes, chants, and songs in
their home languages to support their developing pre-
literacy skills, such as phonological awareness.
It is important to note that general education programs
in English with no specialized instruction or supports
are not providing dual language learners what they
need to succeed academically and develop a strong
foundation in literacy and oral language. In order to
begin to address the needs of dual language learners,
general education programs can augment their
practices in multiple ways. For example schools can
provide home language support by hiring bilingual
paraprofessionals, involving families in the classroom,
creating “grow-your-own” programs, and partnering
with community organizations. Schools and centers
can also provide professional development in ESL
and biliteracy instruction, partner with local colleges/
universities, as well as oer tuition assistance for
teachers to earn their ESL endorsements.
Articulating a specific planned dual language approach
assures coherence and consistency in early literacy
development for dual language learners. It ensures that
ECE educators understand how to engage and leverage
a child’s dual languages most eectively. There are
aspects of eective dual language learner early literacy
instruction shared across these settings, as well as
unique elements specific to each one.
1
2
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
13
Eective Early Literacy
Skills Development for
Dual Language Learners
Regardless of which language program or approach is
selected, eective early literacy skill development for
dual language learners begins with recognizing that
two languages are involved. Dual language learners
leverage the knowledge and the linguistic resources
they have been developing since birth in their home
language when tackling the new task of acquiring early
literacy skills, even when that exposure to literacy
occurs in a new language (English). Whether in a
Bilingual/Dual Language classroom or an English
with home language support classroom, early literacy
development occurs in the context of first and second
(or subsequent) language development. Eective
approaches recognize this fundamental reality and
leverage the dual language development process as
children are introduced to the skills and practices of
literacy.
The brain processes and builds language systems in
relation to each other. Developing both the home
language and English simultaneously leads to strong
cognitive, educational, and social benefits. Robust
home language skills provide a foundation for, and
frequently transfer to, developing English language
skills. Rich language experiences in the home language
are the bedrock for solid language competencies in
a new language and serve as assets for supporting
children along a pathway toward full bilingualism (and
eventual biliteracy).
Research findings demonstrate that proficiency
in a first language promotes literacy and school
achievement in a second language (Cárdenas-Hagán
& Carlson, 2007; Collier & Thomas, 2017; Lindholm-
Leary, 2012). The eect is greatest when initial
literacy exposure and instruction occur in the child’s
dominant language, where they have the strongest
base of oral language and where text will have the
strongest meaning. Children who are learning English
as a new language are more likely to become readers
and writers of English when they are already familiar
with the vocabulary and concepts in their primary
language. Eective literacy approaches ensure that
children maintain their home language while learning
to speak and read English. Such approaches include
non-English materials and resources in the classroom
to support the home language of dual language
learners while they also acquire oral proficiency and
begin to engage with text in English.
Research shows that emergent literacy skills in the
home language can help facilitate parallel skills in
English referred to as cross-linguistic connections,
transfer, or bridging (Lems et al., 2017). In addition,
metalinguistic awareness, including the ability to
recognize that other languages exist and have dierent
characteristics, is important for reading development
and is heightened in bilingual children (Bouchereau
and Gort, 2012; Jarvis and Pavlenko, 2007). This
finding is a key reason to foster literacy in both
languages and to align even early literacy instruction
across the languages. Understanding how the two
languages of dual language learners “interact in
cognitive processes, how bilingual brains function and
benefit from handling two languages, the intersection
of the two languages, and the use of cross-linguistic
connections to expand children’s metabilingual
awareness, provide the basis for formulating sound
biliteracy practices'' (Soltero, 2016, p. 89). The
continued development of the child’s home language—
with an explicit emphasis on the development of
strong oral language—is a direct source of support
for the child’s acquisition of English and successful
reading in English later on. Attention to dual language
development throughout literacy education is needed
for all emerging bilingual students. For dual language
learners in ECE classrooms, research suggests that
a sound instructional approach to early literacy at a
minimum includes the following five components:
Language-Rich and Print-Rich Learning
Environments
A language-rich and print-rich environment is a
resource and tool for all children but is particularly
important for dual language learners developing
literacy in English as a new language. Seeing print
in their environment and providing children ample
opportunities to connect that print to spoken language
helps them develop print awareness and become
familiar with the language and how it works. It serves
1
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
14
as a reference for comprehending text and underscores
the many purposes of print. Teachers intentionally
create such an environment through classroom libraries
of books related to the topics children are learning. The
teachers may label key items in the classroom (color-
coded by language), create charts and print resources
to capture what the class is learning, and engage
children in drawing and dictating their stories and
responses to their learning experiences. These “learning
stories” become part of the classrooms’ student-
created walls and learning library. Regularly referring
to and using print in the environment is pivotal to
internalized learning.
Children from preschools with extensive access to and
interaction with print (e.g., through adult read-alouds
and class libraries) prior to the start of formal schooling
have a head start in literacy socialization compared to
children with less opportunity to interact with print
during their early years. Print immersion is one of the
aspects of early childhood education with the greatest
eect size in supporting later literacy skills. (Hiebert &
Martin, 2010; Lindsay, J. 2010; Wylie, Hodgen et.al.,
2006). Moreover, the causal relationship between
early print access, literacy engagement, and literacy
achievement holds for both native and non-native
speakers of the school language.
Active, Positive Engagement with Text in
the Home Language and English
Another critical component of eective literacy
instruction for dual language learners is active
exposure, to and positive engagement with extended
text, including books in the student’s home language
as well as English. Part of becoming a reader is
understanding the uses and purposes of text as
well as the power of text to communicate, convey
information, narrate, and entertain. Children become
readers because they experience print as useful
for their own purposes and books as beneficial or
enjoyable. The degree of positive immersion and
experience with print in the early years is highly
correlated with later success as readers. For dual
language learners, eective reading approaches
involve surrounding children with access to interesting,
relevant, and culturally inclusive books in both of their
languages. The idea is to engage them with interactive
and dialogic read-alouds, and shape inquiry projects
in which the children want to turn to books for
information. This is how they become increasingly
socialized to literacy, come to know the purposes
and gifts of reading, and understand that literacy has
applications in and across their linguistic and cultural
worlds. Concepts of print are established through
frequent engagement with books. For dual language
learners, this means creating a print immersive and
engaging environment using books in both their
languages.
Rich Oral Language and Wide Vocabulary
Development in Both Languages
Early literacy development builds on the foundation of
a strong base of oral language and vocabulary in both
the home language and English, acquired through
hearing and producing the languages in the context
of relationships and interaction while exploring
and learning about the world. The more expressive,
complex, and precise the language that children hear
(in both the home language and English), and the
greater the extent and authenticity of the language
they hear, the more expressive, complex, and precise
their own language will be as they use it to meet their
individual needs. Oral language is the foundation
for literacy. Dual language learners with solid oral
language skills and vocabulary in their home language
are positioned to engage in the mechanics of reading,
and can recognize the sounds, words, and structures
of other languages to grasp the meaning of what
they see and hear. For dual language learners who are
developing early literacy in English, the development
of oral language and background knowledge in English
is crucial to eective early literacy approaches,
helping to connect the association of sounds and
text with meaning. The repertoire of vocabulary that
dual language learners develop as preschoolers is an
important precursor to their development of reading
skills and comprehension. Therefore, the books
selected to read to children should present expressive
language, precise word usage, and a range of language
syntaxes. As children develop vocabulary in their
home language and English, they will benefit by
exposure to the relationship between the vocabulary
2
3
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
15
of the two languages, including common roots and
cognates. Attentiveness to the sound and structures of
language supports learners’ engagement in literacy in
multiple languages.
Phonological Awareness in and
Through Both Languages
Phonological awareness, the ability to hear the
language sounds, is a precursor to word reading
ability. Chanting, singing, rhyming, and attending to
the sounds that comprise words are eective ways
to support children in homing in on the sounds of
language, which prepares them to approach the task
of decoding words. During the emergent literacy
phase as children develop their oral language and their
early phonological awareness, dual language learners
acquire an increasingly sophisticated comparative
understanding of each of their languages. It is
important to oer consistent opportunities to hear and
engage in each language separately and authentically.
As children are introduced to the alphabet and exposed
to text, the phonological distinctions between the
sounds of their two languages become an essential
element in preparing for later attention to and
instruction in foundational phonics skills and decoding
in two languages.
Building Cross-Linguistic Connections and
Metalinguistic Awareness
As dual language learners engage in early literacy, they
do so through both (or all) their languages. They are
developing bilingual identities (“I have two languages!”)
and comparing and contrasting their languages as they
incorporate more sophisticated language systems
into each language (“It works this way in Spanish, and
that way in English.”) Some aspects of literacy are
the same across their languages, and some function
dierently. Naming these dierences, and helping
children understand (and celebrate) that they are
developing two language systems with some similarities
and some dierences, is the beginning of cross-
language metalinguistic awareness, an essential early
literacy skill for dual language learners. The degree to
which children are supported in the process of sorting
out and building metalinguistic awareness and specific
language/literacy systems, the more successful
they can be in leveraging the two languages and
engaging in literacy in each language. Whether it
is developing concepts of print (how print works
and how it may dier across languages), alphabetic
knowledge (the same letters may have dierent
sounds in dierent languages), or early decoding, the
more teachers understand the comparative features
of the languages spoken by learners —and the more
they utilize strategies for building cross-language
connections, supporting transfer and engaging
translanguaging—the more eective literacy
education will be for dual language learners.
Other necessary early literacy skills, such as memory,
visual recall, and writing, are developed most
eectively with attention to the dual language brain
and the bicultural realities of dual language learners.
ECE teachers are encouraged to leverage, to the
degree possible, the stronger comprehension and oral
language base a learner has in the home language to
introduce new literacy skills. For example, educators
can initiate early literacy activities such as narrative
retelling or dictating a story by first engaging children
in skill-building utilizing their home language.
4
5
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
16
Important Conditions for
Literacy Development
In addition to the five components of early literacy
instruction described above, important contextual
features are found to contribute to the eective
development of literacy for dual language learners.
These research-based conditions facilitate dual
language learners’ motivation and engagement with
books and enhance their development of early
literacy skills.
Literacy Development Integrated with
Content Learning
Thematic units built around relevant and exciting
science and social studies topics and themes are an
excellent way to provide the content context for
early literacy development. In such contexts, literacy
has a purpose, and oral language, vocabulary, and
background knowledge serve as building blocks for
literacy and give meaning to the words and sentences
children encounter in books. They engage with
print as they learn about and explore the world with
tangible, hands-on learning experiences that give
meaning to language and provide a purpose for text.
High-Quality Relevant and Culturally
Inclusive/Responsive Texts and Materials
Materials selected should arm children’s identities
and heritage and help them develop a positive self-
image as they make connections to the text. The
comprehensiveness and inclusiveness of books and
materials in the classroom—especially those used
in literacy instruction—influence the eectiveness
of early literacy instruction. For dual language
learners, this includes linguistic, cultural, racial/
ethnic, and national identities and perspectives.
High-quality materials also comprise books with
expressive, beautiful, and complex language, avoiding
the simplified and impoverished written materials
frequently provided to young emergent bilinguals and
relying instead on teachers’ instructional strategies to
scaold engagement with rich text.
An Arming and Inclusive Climate of
Support for Home Language, Culture, and
Bilingualism
While attention to both of a child’s languages is vital
to how literacy instruction is approached, the overall
aective climate and messaging about the value of
the home language and culture are crucial to the
motivation and academic to dual language learners’
success. Young children absorb attitudes about the
status and value of languages and cultures and quickly
determine whether their family, culture, and language
have a place and are respected in the school. An
unwelcoming or, worse yet, hostile environment that
devalues cultural and linguistic diversity influences the
degree to which dual language learners view literacy
as relevant to them. A disarming environment is a
significant factor in language loss and rejection, which
have an impact on both language development and
school participation. An arming climate and respect
for a child’s home language and culture is a condition
for active participation, engagement, and eective
learning. Programs in which dual language learners
develop strong early literacy skills provide messaging
that arms the value of bilingualism and biliteracy.
These types of settings welcome and embrace
families and communities, and utilize literacy practices
that foster home-community-school connections.
1
2
3
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
17
HOW IT LOOKS IN BILINGUAL/DUAL
LANGUAGE CLASSROOMS
• Focus on expanding children’s bilingual/
biliteracy development.
• Emphasize oral language and vocabulary in both
the home language and English.
• Literacy and oral language development occurs
within the context of learning about the world –
the focus on literacy is integrated with content.
• Children are immersed in the home language a
minimum of 50% of the time engaged.
• Teachers/adults act as language models using
the home language authentically.
• Use predictable/pattern language books to
connect to discrete skills in the home language.
• Use linguistically/culturally authentic books in
both languages, and engage bilingual children
with cross-linguistic connections (similarities/
dierence between their home language and
English).
• Incorporate children’s home language
varieties, English varieties in the U.S., and
translanguaging.
• Include daily ESL time that is meaning-oriented
and integrates content (songs, rhymes, stories,
fingerplays, retelling, games, etc.).
• Use language development benchmarks and
ESL state standards that are appropriate for
young dual language learners.
• Incorporate families’ funds of knowledge, invite
them to share their linguistic, culturally, and
lived experiences and knowledge.
HOW IT LOOKS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE
CLASSROOMS
• Focus on oral language development.
• Literacy and oral language development occurs
within the context of learning about the
world – the focus on literacy is integrated with
content.
• Dierentiate the instruction and assessments
for dual language learners from that of native
English speakers.
• Use predictable/pattern language books to
teach discrete skills.
• Use linguistically/culturally authentic.
• Ask children to connect to and think about how
things are said in their home language.
• Always accept the language in which children
speak and express themselves.
• Learn key phrases and vocabulary in children’s
home language and use them in instruction and
informal conversations with children.
• Use specialized language (ESL) strategies
integrates content (songs, rhymes, stories,
fingerplays, retelling, games, etc.).
• Use language development benchmarks and
ESL state standards that are appropriate for
young dual language learners.
• Incorporate families’ funds of knowledge, invite
them to share their linguistic, culturally, and
lived experiences and knowledge.
Below is a brief comparison of how teachers support early literacy development in the Bilingual/Dual Language
classroom vs. the English general education classroom and oers some ideas on how to optimize dual language
learners’ school experience.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
18
Toward a Comprehensive and Eective Early Literacy
Approach for Dual Language Learners
This research-based description of eective early literacy instruction and how literacy develops for dual
language learners dier greatly from prevalent current tendencies to double-down on foundational skills
instruction in the preschool years. It’s a mistaken belief to assume that the sooner discrete reading skills
instruction begins, the better. The research on young children points instead to a very dierent orientation
that utilizes the preschool years to build language in the context of learning and play. Here, socializing children
into literacy practices and focusing on precursor skills will build a solid foundation for their later success as
readers and writers.
For young children whose home languages are other than English, the research points to the need for explicit
attention to the fact that the development of literacy is fundamentally influenced by the reality of having two
(or more) languages and is, therefore, dierent from literacy development of monolingual English-speaking
children. A comprehensive and successful early literacy approach for dual language learners begins with the
clear articulation of a planned language approach that provides clarity to sta members about how to engage
a child’s dual language capacities most eectively. It includes attention to literacy socialization and active
engagement with books in both languages, creating a language-rich and print-rich classroom environment,
building oral language and wide vocabulary in both languages, building phonological awareness in and through
both languages, attending to cross-language connections, memory, and visual recall, and emergent skills in
writing. All of this is enhanced and made more eective in contexts where literacy development is integrated
with content learning, high-quality culturally inclusive/ responsive materials are used, and an overall assets-
oriented, arming, and inclusive climate is present.
School/district leaders, program directors, ECE teachers, and policymakers all share responsibility for avoiding
the adoption of early literacy curriculum, instruction, and models that fail to embrace the research findings on
comprehensive, linguistically, and culturally responsive early literacy that works for dual language learners.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
19
CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
In this paper, we provide research-based arguments to counter the current English-centric science of
reading approaches that are particularly ill-advised for dual language learners. In their place, we delineate
a comprehensive research-based approach to early literacy instruction for dual language learners that is
linguistically and culturally responsive and developmentally appropriate. Of critical importance for the early
childhood education field is to move away from “simplistic, out-of-date, and inappropriate responses and to
instead build national and state eorts around literacy to attend to what we know works for ELs/EBs [English
learners/emergent bilinguals],” (Escamilla et al., 2022, p. 13). As Escamilla and colleagues (2022) assert, “We
cannot prescribe a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching reading when the children who enroll in our schools
represent such diversity.”
Given the unparalleled role that early childhood education plays in building early language and literacy skills
for all young children, adopting pedagogical approaches grounded in biliteracy and second language acquisition
is imperative for dual language learners’ school success. Research in bilingual education points to critical
characteristics of quality early childhood programs for dual language learners that include their home language
and culture, fully engage their families as educational partners, and implement linguistically and culturally
responsive approaches.
As ECE educators contend with knowing how to navigate conflicting messages regarding literacy instruction,
we must look to credible sources in the field to guide our decision-making, including the National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) statement On Responding to Linguistic and Cultural Diversity:
“[NAEYC’s] recommendations emphasize
that early childhood programs are responsible
for creating a welcoming environment that
respects diversity, supports children’s ties to their
families and community, and promotes both
second language acquisition and preservation
of children’s home languages and cultural
identities.”
(https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/
globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/
position-statements/diversity.pdf)
Linguistic and cultural diversity is an asset,
not a deficit, for young children. We oer the
following recommendations for early childhood
educators, school/district leaders, researchers, and
policymakers in adopting best practices for dual
language learner education. The recommendations
are based on research related to bilingualism and early
literacy development for dual language learners.
Research in bilingual
education points to critical
characteristics of quality
early childhood programs
for dual language learners
that include their home
language and culture, fully
engage their families as
educational partners, and
implement linguistically
and culturally responsive
approaches.
Critical Recommendations for
Dual Language Learner Education
Early Childhood Teacher and Leadership
Preparation and Professional Development
Instructional Approaches, Materials and
Curriculum
Linguistically and Culturally Appropriate
Assessments
Policy
Research
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
20
Early Childhood Teacher and Leadership
Preparation and Professional Development
1. Include required coursework in the acquisition and
assessment of English as a new language, biliteracy
methods, and ESL in early childhood education and
leadership licensure programs.
2. Provide scholarship/tuition incentives for early
childhood teachers and leaders to earn their bilingual
education and/or ESL endorsements.
3. Integrate required teacher and leader professional
development on the theory, research, and pedagogy
of dual language learner education, including second
language literacy, biliteracy, and linguistically and
culturally responsive education.
4. Allocate funds for educators and leaders to attend
conferences or professional learning seminars that
focus on research-based practices for dual language
learners.
5. Ensure that all early childhood educators—not just
bilingual and ESL teachers—participate in extended
professional development on dual language learner
education.
Instructional Approaches, Materials,
and Curriculum
1. Adopt a comprehensive early literacy approach for
dual language learners that is grounded in research
and theory in second language acquisition and
biliteracy. At a minimum, this approach should include:
a. Active, positive engagement with text in the
home language and English;
b. A language-rich, print-rich environment;
c. Rich oral language and wide vocabulary
development in both languages;
d. Phonological awareness in and through both
languages;
e. Building cross-language connections and
metalinguistic awareness.
2. Ensure early childhood pre-literacy practices are
developmentally appropriate and focused on the
precursors to literacy, not on explicit and discrete
“reading skills.”
3. Follow a curriculum and implement literacy
instruction that is culturally and linguistically
responsive and developmentally appropriate.
4. Utilize instructional materials that reflect the
languages and cultures of the classroom community
in authentic ways to develop learners’ languages,
biliteracy skills, and conceptual understanding.
5. Ensure plentiful access to and daily engagement
with books and print in both home language and
English.
6. Dierentiate instruction based on children’s English
proficiency levels and include specific English
language learning objectives connected to English
Language Development (also called English as a
Second Language) state standards.
7. Value families’ varied home literacy practices,
including oral literacies, as culturally and
linguistically bound assets to be tapped and
integrated into classroom instruction.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
21
Linguistically and Culturally Appropriate
Assessments
1. When possible, use assessments in the child’s home
language, including norm-referenced and authentic/
performance-based tools.
2. Ensure assessments that are used with dual language
learners have been normed on this population. If
these assessments were not specifically designed
for dual language learners, be sure to follow the
suggested guidance about how to interpret the results
for dual language learners.
3. Ideally, no assessments that were designed for and
normed exclusively on monolingual English speakers
should be used with dual language learners. If such
assessments are used with this population, their
results should be interpreted with extreme caution
and they should never be used in isolation. Their
results should be interpreted alongside the results of
other measures that have been normed on and are
appropriate for dual language learners.
4. Reevaluate inappropriate school readiness indicators
that drive expectations and curriculum, prioritize
academic readiness over developmental benchmarks,
and are based on an English-centric orientation.
Policy
1. For dual language learners, base policy decisions on
the research related to bilingualism and early literacy
development for dual language. Be wary of policy
proposals (even those that may claim to represent
the “science of reading”) that are primarily based on
monolingual English speakers and does not address
second language acquisition and its connection to
English literacy development, much less biliteracy
development. Moreover, an overemphasis and
unnecessarily didactic approach to discrete reading skills
is not developmentally appropriate for early learning.
2. Include bilingual education and biliteracy researchers
and experts early in any national, state, and/or local
policy eorts that legislate or mandate pedagogical
practices for dual language learners. Ensure their
expertise informs decisions that aect access to
linguistically and culturally responsive education for
dual language learners.
3. Increase the bilingual ECE teacher pipeline and
partner with universities to provide bilingual
education and ELD/ESL endorsements.
4. Expand state legislated requirements to provide
specialized services (e.g., bilingual education,
ELD/ESL education) for dual language learners in
preschool and Head Start (see Illinois School Code
Article 14c that encompasses PK-12).
5. Consider the impact of policies on both children’s
emotional wellbeing and the bonds between them
and their families.
6. Promote policies that support multilingualism for
all children.
Research
1. Broadly disseminate seminal and current research
on early childhood bilingualism and second language
acquisition, early biliteracy development, and
linguistically and culturally responsive education.
2. Expand research on the benefits of maintaining/
developing children’s first language and culture as an
integral part of their long-term academic success.
3. Conduct large-scale empirical research on the
eects of the English-centric, discrete skills
orientation of the “science of reading” on dual
language learners’ short- and long-term literacy
development, academic achievement, and overall
school performance.
Dual language learners come to early childhood
classrooms with a plethora of linguistic and cultural
assets. Although these children and their families
are disproportionately more likely to face significant
challenges than non-dual language learners—including
experiencing poverty, limited access to health services,
and food insecurity—these children, like all children,
have enormous potential that can be fully realized if
they are given the right opportunities. A high- quality
education beginning in early childhood is one of these
opportunities. For dual language learners, this includes
an early education classroom that uses a comprehensive
early literacy approach that is developmentally
appropriate and embraces children’s linguistic and
cultural assets.
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
22
Arias, M. B. & Fee, M. (2018). Profiles of dual language education in the
21st century. CAL Series on Language Education. Bristol, UK: Multilingual
Matters.
Anderson, R. (2012). First language loss in Spanish-speaking children. In B.
A. Goldstein (Ed.), Bilingual language development and disorders in Spanish-
English speakers (pp. 193–212). Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Alanís, I., & Iruka, I. U. (Eds.). (2021). Advancing equity & embracing diversity
in early childhood education: Elevating voices and actions. National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).
Ballinger, S., Man Chu Lau, S., & Quevillon Lacasse, C. (2020). Cross-
linguistic pedagogy: Harnessing transfer in the classroom. The Canadian
Modern Language Review, 76(4), 265–277.
Barnett, W. S., & Frede, E. (2010). The promise of preschool: Why we need
early education for all. American Educator, 34(1), 21–29, 40.
Barnett, W. S., Hustedt, J. T., Hawkinson, L. E., & Robin K. B. (2006). The
state of preschool 2006. Rutgers University National Institute for Early
Education Research. http://nieer.org/sites/nieer/files/2006yearbook.pdf
Barnett, W. S, Yarosz, D. J., Thomas, J. H., Jung, K., & Blanco, D. (2007).
Two-way monolingual English immersion in preschool education: An
experimental comparison. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 277–293.
Bassok, D., Latham, S., & Rorem, A. (2016). Is kindergarten the new first
grade? AERA Open, 1(4), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858415616358
Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and
cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Bialystok, E. (2011). Reshaping the mind: The benefits of bilingualism.
Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65(4), 220–235.
Bialystok, E., Craik, F., & Luk, G. (2012). Bilingualism: Consequences for
mind and brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(4), 240–250.
Bouchereau Bauer, E. & Gort, M. (2012). Early biliteracy development.
Exploring young learners’ use of their linguistic resources. New York, NY: Routledge
Callahan, R. M. (2013). The English learner dropout dilemma: Multiple risks
and multiple resources. California Dropout Research Project Report #19.
University of California, Santa Barbara. http://cdrpsb.org/pubs_reports.htm
Callahan, R., & Gándara, P. (2014). The bilingual advantage: Language,
literacy and the US labor market. Multilingual Matters.
Caravolas, M. (2004). Spelling development in alphabetic writing systems:
A cross-linguistic perspective. European Psychologist, 9(1), 3–14.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.9.1.3
Cárdenas-Hagán, E., & Carlson, C. D. (2007). The cross-linguistic transfer
of early literacy skills: The role of initial L1 and L2 skills and language of
instruction. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 38(3),
249–259.
Castro, D. C., & Franco, X. (2021). Equitable learning opportunities for
young bilingual children: Strategies to promote oral language development.
In I. Alanís & I. U. Iruka (Eds.), Advancing equity & embracing diversity in
early childhood education: Elevating voices and actions (pp. 73–76). National
Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).
Collier, V. P., & Thomas, W. P. (2017). Validating the power of bilingual
schooling: Thirty-two years of large-scale, longitudinal research. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 203–217.
Durán, L., & Hikida, M. (2022). Making sense of reading’s forever wars.
Kappan, 103(8), 14-19.
Durán, L., Roseth, C., Homan, P., Robertshaw. (2013). Spanish-speaking
preschoolers’ early literacy development: A longitudinal experimental
comparison of predominantly English and transitional bilingual education.
Bilingual Research Journal, 36(1), 6–34.
Escamilla, K., Butvilofsky, S., & Hopewell, S. (2018). What gets lost when
English-only writing assessment is used to assess writing proficiency in
Spanish-English emerging bilingual learners? International Multilingual
Research Journal, 12(4), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2016.1
273740
Escamilla, K., Olsen, L., & Slavick, J. (2022). Toward comprehensive
eective literacy policy and instruction for English learner/emergent bilingual
students. National Committee for Eective Literacy for Emergent Bilingual
Students. https://multilingualliteracy.org/
Espinosa, L. M., & Magruder, E. S. (2015). Practical and proven strategies
for teaching young dual language learners. In L. M. Espinosa (Ed.), Getting it
right for young children from diverse backgrounds: Applying research to improve
practice with a focus on dual language learners (2nd ed., pp. 76–113). Pearson.
Franchino, E. (2021, February 16). Addressing dyslexia: Highlights from the
Cardona hearing. New America. https://www.newamerica.org/education-
policy/edcentral/addressing-dyslexia-highlights-from-the-cardona-hearing/
Genesee, F. (2018). Taking stock: Lessons on dual language education. In M.
B. Arias & M. Fee (Eds.), Profiles of dual language education in the 21st century
(pp. 133-152). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Genesee, F., Paradis, J., & Crago, M. B. (2011). Dual language development
and disorders: A handbook on bilingualism and second language learning.
Brookes Publishing Company.
Gomez, R. (2016). Sustaining the benefits of early childhood education
experiences: A research overview. Voices in Urban Education, 43, 5–14.
Gonzalez, V., & Miller, M. (2020). Reading & writing with English learners: A
framework for K-5. Seidlitz Education.
Grosjean, F. (2021). Life as a bilingual: Knowing and using two or more
languages. Cambridge University Press.
Hammer, C. S., Ho, E., Uchikoshi, Y., Gillanders, C., Castro, D. C., &
Sandilos. L. E. (2014). The language and literacy development of young
dual language learners: A critical review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,
29(4), 715–733.
Hiebert, E. H. & Martin, L. A. (2010). Opportunity to read: A critical but
neglected construct in reading instruction In E.H. Hiebert (Ed.), Reading
more, reading better (pp. 3-29). New York, NY: Guilford.
Herrera, S. (2022). Biography-driven culturally responsive teaching: Honoring
race, ethnicity, and personal history (3rd ed). Teachers College Press.
Herrera, S. G., Cabral, R. M., & Murry, K. G. (2020). Assessment
accommodations of culturally and linguistically diverse students (3rd ed.).
Pearson.
Herrera, S., Peréz, D., & Escamilla, K. (2015). Teaching reading to English
language learners: Dierentiated literacies (2nd ed). Allyn & Bacon.
Krizman, J., Marian, V., Shook, A., Skoe, E., & Kraus, N. (2012). Subcortical
encoding of sound is enhanced in bilinguals and relates to executive function
advantages. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(20), 7877-
7881.
Jarvis, S. & Pavlenko, A. (2007). Crosslinguistic influence in language and
cognition. New York, NY: Routledge
REFERENCES
EARLY LITERACY DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTION FOR DUAL LANGUAGE LEARNERS IN EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
23
Lems, K., Miller, L. D., & Soro, T. M. (2017). Building literacy with English
language learners: Insights from linguistics. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2012). Success and challenges in dual language
education. Theory into practice, 51(4), 256-262. https://doi.org/10.1080/0
0405841.2012.726053
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2014). Bilingual and biliteracy skills in young
Spanish-speaking low-SES children: Impact of instructional language and
primary language proficiency. International Journal of Bilingual Education
and Bilingualism, 17(2), 144–159.
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2016). Bilingualism and academic achievement in
children in dual language programs. In E. Nicoladis & S. Montanari (Eds.),
Bilingualism across the lifespan: Factors moderating language proficiency (pp.
203– 223). American Psychological Association.
Lindsay, J. (2010). Children’s access to print material and education-
related outcomes. Findings from a meta-analytic review. Naperville, IL:
Learning Point Associates.
Mehisto & Genesee, F. (2015). Building bilingual education systems:
Forces, mechanisms, and counterweights. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Migration Policy Institute. (2021, May 18). Young dual language learners
in the United States and by state. https://www.migrationpolicy.org/
programs/data-hub/charts/us-state-profiles-young-dlls
Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the kindergarten: Why children need
to play in school. Alliance for Childhood.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Ne, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of
knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes
and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. https://www.jstor.org/
stable/1476399
Montanari, S., Simón-Cereijido, G., & Hartel, A. (2016). The
development of writing skills in an Italian-English two-way immersion
program: Evidence from first through fifth grade. International
Multilingual Research Journal, 10(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/1931
3152.2016.1118670
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017).
Promoting the educational success of children and youth learning
English: Promising Futures. The National Academies Press. https://doi.
org/10.17226./24677
Olsen, L. (2010). Reparable harm: Fulfilling the unkept promise
of educational opportunity for California’s long-term English
learners. Californians Together. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/
summary?doi=10.1.1.372.9438
Paez, M. M., Tabors, P. O., & Lopez, L. M. (2007). Dual language and
literacy development of Spanish-speaking preschool children. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(2), 85–102.
Park, S., Martinez, M., & Chou, F. (2017). CCSSO English learners
with disabilities guide. Washington DC: Council of Chief State School
Ocers.
Portes, A., & Hao, L. (2002). The price of uniformity: Language, family and
personality adjustment in the immigrant second generation.
Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(6), 889–912.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0141987022000009368
REL Northwest. (2016). 50 state scan of kindergarten readiness and
assessments. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/northwest/blog/
kindergarten-readiness.asp
Rice, M., & Gilsen, C. B. (2022). Dyslexia identification: Tackling current
issues in schools. Intervention in School and Clinic.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512221081278
Rumbaut, R. (2014). English plus: Exploring the socio-economic benefits of
bilingualism in Southern California. In R. Callahan & P. Gándara (Eds.), The
bilingual advantage: Language, literacy and the U.S. labor market (pp. 184–210).
Multilingual Matters.
Sanfilippo, J., Ness, M., Petscher, Y., Rappaport, L., Zuckerman, B., & Gaab,
N. (2020). Reintroducing dyslexia: Early Identification and implications for
pediatric practice. Pediatrics, 146(1). https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2019-3046
Santibañez, L., & Zárate, M. E. (2014). Bilinguals in the United States
and college enrollment. In R. Callahan & P. Gándara (Eds.), The bilingual
advantage: Language, literacy and the U.S. labor market (pp. 213–234).
Multilingual Matters.
Skibba, R. (2018). How a second language can boost the brain. Knowable
Magazine. https://knowablemagazine.org/article/mind/2018/how-second-
language-can-boost-brain
Soltero, S. W. (2011). Schoolwide approaches to educating ELLs: Creating
linguistically and culturally responsive K-12 schools. Heinemann.
Soltero, S. W. (2016). Dual language education. Program design and
implementation. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Sousa, D. A. (2017). How the brain learns (5th ed). Corwin Press.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (n.d). Head Start Program
Performance Standards, 1302.31 Teaching and the learning environment.
https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/policy/45-cfr-chap-xiii/1302-31-teaching-
learning-environment
Weisenfeld, G. G., Garver, K., & Hodges, K. (2020). Federal and state eorts
in the implementation of Kindergarten Entry Assessments (2011-2018).
Early Education and Development, 31(5), 632–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/1
0409289.2020.1720481
Wong Fillmore, L. (2000). Loss of family languages: Should educators be
concerned? Theory Into Practice, 39(4), 203–210.
Wong Fillmore, L. (1991). When learning a second language means losing the
first. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6(3), 323–346.
Wylie, C., Hodgen, E., Ferral, H., & Thompson, J. (2006). Contributions
of early childhood to age-14 performance: Evidence from the Competent
Children, Competent Learners project. New Zealand Council for Educational
Research Report. Wellington: New Zealand.
1 There are many terms used to describe instructional strategies/methods used to
teach students who are learning English in schools as a new language. Other terms
include English Language Development (ELD), English as a Second Language (ESL),
and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). In this paper, English as a
new language is used most often since some monolingual English speakers are also
developing their English in schools and some dual language learners are not learning
English as a second (but maybe as a third or even fourth) language. However, ELD/
ESL is still used in the paper to refer to ELD/ESL instructional strategies and standards.
2 Several terms are used by education agencies and districts to refer to students
not yet proficient in English who are developing it as a second language. The most
common include English language learners (ELLs), English learners (ELs), and
emergent bilinguals (EBs). In the early childhood education sphere, the term used is
dual language learners (DLLs). See “A note on terminology,” p. 4, in Escamilla et al.,
2022, for more information about these terms.
ENDNOTES
For more information, email us at: info@MultilingualLiteracy.org
MultilingualLiteracy.org
The National Committee for Eective Literacy (NCEL) uplifts research, policies and practices to ensure
that English learner/emergent bilingual students leave school as proficient readers and writers in English and
preferably more languages and who thrive and succeed in school and their communities. We are researchers,
teacher educators, teachers, administrators, school board members and advocates from across the nation with
deep expertise in literacy and the education of English learners/emergent bilingual students.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Socorro G. Herrera, Ed.D., is Professor in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction, College of
Education at Kansas State University and serves as the Executive Director of the Center for Intercultural and
Multilingual Advocacy (CIMA). Her research focuses on the role that personal histories of the learner, family,
and teacher play in literacy development and culturally responsive, sustaining pedagogy, reading strategies and
teacher preparation for diverse classrooms.
Martha Martinez, Ph.D., is Senior Director of Research and Evaluation at SEAL a P-5 model of English
learner education, currently being replicated in 100 schools across 20 school districts in California. Dr.
Martha I. Martinez has over 15 years of experience researching programs and policies designed to improve
educational outcomes for underserved populations, and over ten years of experience examining EL issues
specifically. Prior to joining SEAL in 2017, Dr. Martinez worked at the Oregon Department of Education
where she served as co-Principal Investigator on two Research-Practice Partnerships focused on the state’s
EL programs and outcomes.
Laurie Olsen, Ph.D., was the founding Director and now serves as Strategic Advisor to SEAL, a P-5 model
of EL-centric language education, currently being replicated in 100 schools across 20 school districts in
California. She serves as President of Californians Together, is on the Steering Committee of the National
Committee for Eective Literacy, and has published dozens of books, videos and articles on English Learner
and bilingual education. For 23 years, she directed California Tomorrow’s work in PK-12 education, and has
spent the last five decades researching, writing, advocating, and providing technical assistance on educational
equity with an emphasis on immigrant, English Learner education, bilingual education, language access and rights.
Sonia W. Soltero, Ph.D., is Professor and Chair of the Department of Leadership, Language, and Curriculum
at DePaul University. She earned her Ph.D. from the University of Arizona with a focus on bilingual education
and literacy and is a former Fellow of the Institute for Latino Studies at the University of Notre Dame.
Dr. Soltero has been involved in bilingual and dual language education for more than thirty-five years as a
university professor, researcher, author, professional developer, and former dual language teacher.