Within the program there is a balance of language minority and language majority students, and all students have the opportunity to be both first language models and second language learners. Children in these groups help each other through cooperative learning. The programs create an additive bilingual environment for all students since the first language is maintained while the second language is acquired. Two-way bilingual immersion programs strive to promote bilingualism and bi-literacy, grade-level academic achievement, positive cross-cultural attitudes and behaviors in all students and success with children of limited intellectual ability (Malherbe, 1969) and children with language disabilities. (Bruck and Hebert, 1982) Additionally, children learn language use through content, building true comprehension and fluency. Children build self confidence when they are able to speak another language, and national research shows grades and test scores are better overall from students enrolled in a dual-language program. Children are potentially advanced with respect to metalinguistic awareness. (Duncan and De Avila, 1979)
With respect to human rights, dual language immersion programs are the best manner to provide minority students with equitable education. (Thomas and Collier, 1998) Minority and majority students exit the program fully bilingual and achieve high levels of academic success in both languages, and a minimum of 4 
years is necessary for maximum results to occur. Also, fewer dropouts come from these programs. In addition to English proficiency and increased test scores, a five year study of a bilingual program in Redwood City, California reported that Mexican-American students in the program gained more positive appreciation of Mexican culture but not at the expense of their esteem for the Anglo culture; that school attendance was better than that of the comparison group, and that parents were more positive about the virtues of the Spanish language as opposed to those in the comparison group.
Myths concerning bilingual dual immersion include the following:
Pedagogically speaking, bilingual programs have been shown to be superior to immersion programs. It makes sense that a teacher would want to teach a child in a language they understand, their first language, until they have fully mastered their second language. Research that backs this claim up include : The Ramirez dataset (Ramirez, Yuen and Ramey, 1991) states, "Spanish speaking students can be provided with substantial amounts of primary language instruction without impeding their acquisition of English language and reading skills....The data suggest that by Grade 6, students provided with English-only instruction may actually fall further behind their English speaking peers. Data also document that learning a second language will take six or more years'." (Foundations of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 2nd Ed., Colin Baker, Multilingual Matters Ltd., c 1996 p.213-215)
- The more exposure to English a student is given, the faster and better he/she will learn English.
- The best way to promote English literacy is to immerse children in English-only instruction.
Children are being held in immersion classes for several years. "Prof. David Ramirez of California State University at Long Beach reported that children in immersion were nowhere near ready for the mainstream after one year," even with 70 percent having some English before they started in school. After first grade (two years of immersion), only 21 percent reached the redesignation (mainstreaming) standard, and after grade 2, 38 percent." ("Are children ready for the mainstream after one year of "structured English immersion?"" Stephen Krashen - TESOL Newsletter (in press) (a total 992,126 limited English immigrant students in grades 2 through 11 have failed to become mainstreamed in English only classes after the third year of the passage of Prop. 227 - see LULAC above).
In a Thomas and Collier study, with findings from five large urban and suburban school districts with more than 700,000 language minority student records from 1982-1996, "only quality, long-term, enrichment bilingual programs using current approaches to teaching, such as one-way and two-way developmental bilingual education, when implemented to their full potential, will give language minority students the grade-level cognitive and academic development needed to be academically successful in English, and to sustain their success as they reach their high school years."("School Effectiveness for Language Minority Students" - Thomas and Collier, George Mason University - National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, The George Washington University Center for the Study of Language and Education, Washington, D.C.
http://www.ncbe.gwu.edu/ncbepubs/resource/effectiveness/index.htm)
More recent research also back up these claims. "Stanford 9 English Scores Show - A Consistent Edge For Bilingual Education - by James Crawford - April 15, 2000 - "In 1998-1999, for the third year in a row, students learning English in bilingual education programs scored significantly higher in [English] reading and language than students enrolled in English Only programs, according to the Arizona Department of Education (ADE).
Californians Together: A Roundtable for Quality Education - Bilingual Schools Make Exceptional Gains on the State's Academic Performance Index (API) Children in Bilingual Education Classes Performed Better in Tests of Academic Achievement Than Students Receiving Most of Their Instruction in English "This study shows that both groups of schools made progress on California's API from 1999 to 2000. Bilingual schools exceeded their growth targets for Hispanic students by almost five times, while the comparison schools exceeded their targets by only four times. California parents making such important educational decisions for their children should know that students in bilingual education are performing better and are learning English," said Dr. Norm Gold, who conducted the study at the request of Californians Together.
http://www.californiatomorrow.org/files/pdfs/API_REPORT_PRESS_RELEASE_12-5.PDF
In his article: HERITAGE LANGUAGES, James Crawford addresses the U.S. language needs pointing that it should be of national interest in areas such as the economy, world affairs, and community relations.
In lishting the benefits of bilingual education for individuals, he includes the following areas:
-Cognitive and academic growth. Psychologists have found that bilingualism is correlated with greater mental flexibility, perhaps because command of two symbolic systems provides more than one way to approach a problem. To realize such advantages, however, it appears to be necessary to achieve substantial proficiency in both languages, or “balanced bilingualism” (Hakuta, 1986). Numerous studies have reported that, for limited-English-proficient (LEP) students, cultivating skills in the native tongue leads to superior academic achievement over the long term (e.g., Portes and Hao, 1998).
-Help with identity conflicts. Becoming proficient in the heritage language can assist young people struggling with ethnic ambivalence, or negative attitudes toward their own culture. It enables them not only to explore their roots and associate more closely with fellow speakers of the language, but also to overcome feelings of alienation with a sense of pride in their community. Biliteracy in particular has been associated with greater intellectual confidence and self-esteem (Tse, in press).
-Family values. Communication is crucial to family relationships. When immigrants are limited in English, they must rely entirely on the heritage language to pass on values, advice, and traditions to their children. Yet many immigrant youth tend to rely primarily on English, losing skills in their parents’ or grandparents’ only medium of expression. In such cases, neither generation can make itself understood. Language loss creates barriers within families that produce tension, conflict, and sometimes violence (Wong Fillmore, 1991; Cho & Krashen, 1998). By contrast, children who become fluent bilinguals not only tend to remain closer to their elders but often provide essential services as “language brokers,” helping them negotiate tricky situations in English (Gold, 1999).
-Career advantages. As our marketplace becomes globalized and our population more diverse, bilingualism and biliteracy are valued increasingly by employers. Boswell (1998) found that Florida Hispanics who are fluent in both English and Spanish earned up to 50 percent more than those who speak only English. Similar patterns prevail in California, Texas, New York, and other immigrant-rich states. Besides opportunities in international business, bilinguals have a growing edge in the domestic job market, especially in science, technology, tourism, social services, and education. Ultimately, the graduates of developmental bilingual programs can help to remedy the chronic shortage of teachers for LEP students; that is, “we can grow our own” (Krashen et al., 1998).
-Cultural vitality. Maintaining skills in the heritage language opens worlds of experience that would otherwise be inaccessible – not only literature, art, and music, but also the daily life of ethnic communities. In the case of Native peoples, it can even determine whether those worlds survive. As a member of the Navajo tribal council remarked, in condemning English-only legislation: "Once we lose our language, we lose our culture and we're just another brown-skinned American" (quoted in Shebala, 1999).
- Bilingual education programs are too costly.
All programs serving LEP students--regardless of the language of instruction--require additional staff training, instructional materials, and administration. So they all cost a little more than regular programs for native English speakers. But in most cases the differential is modest. A study commissioned by the California legislature examined a variety of well implemented program models and found no budgetary advantage for English-only approaches. The incremental cost was about the same each year ($175-$214) for bilingual and English immersion programs, as compared with $1,198 for English as a second language (ESL) "pullout" programs. The reason was simple: the pullout approach requires supplemental teachers, whereas in-class approaches do not (Chambers & Parrish, 1992). Nevertheless, ESL pullout remains the method of choice for many school districts, especially where LEP students are diverse, bilingual teachers are in short supply, or expertise is lacking in bilingual methodologies.
- Students “languish” in bilingual programs.
According to Antonio F. D. Cabral, a Democratic state representative, the overwhelming majority of bilingual education students (80 percent) are mainstreamed (into full English classes) in three years or less. Those that aren't may be in special education or may have little or no education before coming to the United States. He also claims that in the past that this sink or swim approach caused a drop out rate of 80 to 90 percent for ELL's (English Language Learners), and that this is why transitional bilingual education was originally developed. (Set Higher Standards, SouthCoast Today http://www.s-t.com/daily/05-01/05-16-01/a12op067.htm originally printed in Commonwealth magazine).
years is necessary for maximum results to occur. Also, fewer dropouts come from these programs. 
