The human factor in primary bilingual programsthe management teams’ perspective

  1. Benjamín Romo Escudero 1
  2. Ramiro Durán Martínez 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Salamanca

    Universidad de Salamanca

    Salamanca, España


Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras

ISSN: 1697-7467

Year of publication: 2019

Issue: 31

Pages: 131-145

Type: Article

More publications in: Porta Linguarum: revista internacional de didáctica de las lenguas extranjeras


In Spain, the interest in bilingual education has led to the implementation of bilingual programs in a large number of schools. Our study uses descriptive research to analyse the perceptions of school management teams regarding the impact of human resources on the design, implementation and supervision of bilingual programs in primary schools within the autonomous community of Castile and Leon. To this end, the answers provided by 70 participants to an ‘ad hoc’ questionnaire were subject to scrutiny. Besides the socio-demographic characteristics of the sample, four dimensions were thoroughly studied: organizational resources (including the design and supervision of the bilingual project as well as the degree of familiarity with and the acceptance of the project), human resources (that is, the number of specialist teachers, teachers with L2 accreditation, and language assistants available), teacher profiles (describing turnover rate, L2 level, and participation in CPD courses) and management teams profiles (providing information on training in bilingual education and on access to CPD courses and on resources for the evaluation of the program). The analysis of the research data is conclusive in identifying the training of management teams and the turnover rate of specialists as key to the success of school bilingual programs.

Bibliographic References

  • Arias, B. & Morillo-Campbell, M. (2008). Promoting ELL Parental Involvement: Challenges in Contested Times. Arizona: Arizona State University, Education Policy Research Unit, available from:, accessed on 16 July, 2017.
  • Cabezuelo, P. & Fernández, R. (2014). “A case study on teacher training needs in the Madrid bilingual project”. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 7(2): 50-70, available from: viewFile/4220/pdf accessed on 16 July, 2017.
  • Collier, V.P. & Thomas, W.P. (2004). “The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual Language Education for All”. NABE Journal of Research and Practice, 2(1): 1-20, available from: http://, accessed on 16 July, 2017.
  • Dalton-Puffer, C. (2007). Discourse in Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) Classrooms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Desai, Z. (2010). “Laissez-faire approaches to language in education policy do not work in South Africa”, in Z. Desai, M. Qorro and B. Brock-Utne (Eds.), Educational Challenges in Multilingual Societies. Cape Town: African Minds, 102-112.
  • Durán, R. & Beltrán, F. (2016). “A Regional Assessment of Bilingual Programs in Primary and Secondary Schools: the Teachers’ Views”. Porta Linguarum, 25: 79-92.
  • European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice (2013). Key Data on Teachers and School Leaders in Europe. 2013 Edition. Eurydice Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  • Fernández, J. Fernández-Costales, A. & Arias, J.M. (2017). “Analysing students’ content-learning in science in CLIL vs. non-CLIL programs: empirical evidence from Spain”. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, February 2017: 1-14.
  • Fernández, R., Pena, C., García, A. & Halbach, A. (2005). “La implantación de proyectos educativos bilingües en la Comunidad de Madrid: las expectativas del profesorado antes de iniciar el proyecto”. Porta Linguarum, 3: 161-173.
  • Fleischmann, E. (2007). “The Growth of a Bilingual School: a Principal´s Perspective”, in A. Camillery (Ed.) Promoting Linguistic Diversity and Whole-school Development. Graz: European Centre for Modern Languages of the Council of Europe: 45-56.
  • Gold, N. (2006). Successful Bilingual Schools: Six Effective Programs in California. San Diego: San Diego County Office of Education.
  • Howard, E., Sugarman, J. & Christian, D. (2003). Trends in Two-Way Immersion Education, a Review of the Research. Baltimore: Center for Applied Linguistics, Report 63, available from:, accessed on 16 July, 2017.
  • Laorden, C. & Peñafiel, E. (2010). “Proyectos bilingües en los centros de la Comunidad Autónoma de Madrid: Percepción de los equipos directivos”. Revista de Investigación Educativa, 28(2): 325-344.
  • Lasagabaster, D. & Ruiz de Zarobe, Y. (2010). (Eds.) CLIL in Spain: lmplementation, Results and Teacher Training. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Lova, Mª., Bolarín, M.J. & Porto, M. (2013). “Programas bilingües en Educación Primaria: valoraciones de docentes”. Porta Linguarum, 20: 253-268.
  • Mehisto, P., Marsh, D. & Frigols, M.J. (2008). Uncovering CLIL. Content and Language Integrated Learning in Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Oxford: Macmillan Education.
  • Montemayor, A. (2004). “Excellent Bilingual Early Childhood Programs. A Parent Guide”. Intercultural Development Research Association, IDRA Newsletter, available from: http://eric., accessed on 17 July, 2017.
  • Morales Vallejo, P., Urosa, S. & Blanco, A. (2003). Construcción de escalas de actitudes tipo likert: Una guía práctica. Madrid: La Muralla.
  • Navés, T. (2011). “Does Content and Language Integrated Learning and Teaching have a future in our schools?” Associació de Professors i Professores d’Anglès de Catalunya (APAC) June 2011_N72, available from:, accessed on 17 July, 2017.
  • Olivares, M. & Pena, C. (2013). “How Do We Teach Our CLIL Teachers? A Case Study from Alcalá University”. Porta Linguarum, 19: 87-99.
  • Pavón, V., Ávila, J., Gallego, A. & Espejo, R. (2014). “Strategic and organisational considerations in planning CLIL: a study on the coordination between content and language teachers”. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 18(4): 409-425.
  • Pena, C. & Porto, Mª.D. (2008). “Teacher beliefs in a CLIL education project”. Porta Linguarum, 10: 151-161.
  • Robledo, M. & Cortez, J.D. (2002). “Successful Bilingual Education Programs: Indicators of Success at the School Level”. Intercultural Development Research Association, IDRA Newsletter, available from:, accessed on 17 July, 2017.
  • Ruiz-Garrido, M. & Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2009) “Needs Analysis in a CLIL Context: A Transfer from ESP”, in D. Marsh and P. Mehisto; D. Wolff, R. Aliaga, T. Asikainen, M. J. FrigolsMartin, S. Hughes, and Gi. Langé (eds.) CLIL Practice: Perspectives from the Field. Finland: University of Jyväskylä: 179-189.
  • Thomas, W.P. & Collier, V.P. (2003). The multiple benefits of dual language. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 61-64, available from:, accessed on 17 July, 2017.
  • Travé, G. (2013). Un estudio sobre las representaciones del profesorado de Educación Primaria acerca de la enseñanza bilingüe. Revista de Educación, 361: 1–14, available from: http://, accessed on 17 July, 2017.
  • Villarreal, A. (2009) Ten Principles for an Effective Education Plan for English Language Learners at the Secondary Level. Intercultural Development Research Association, IDRA Newsletter. San Antonio, Texas. Retrieved on 21 July 2016 available from: IDRA_Newsletter/January_2009_Curriculum_Quality_and_Access/Ten_Principles_Part_I