The Corner

Education

Evidence Mounts Against the ‘Bilingual Advantage’

When California reinstated bilingual education in a 2016 referendum, the text of the new law declared: “A large body of research has demonstrated the cognitive, economic, and long-term academic benefits of multilingualism and multiliteracy.” This argument that bilingual education is useful because it confers general mental benefits — such as improved “executive function” and “cognitive flexibility” — has proven irresistible for bilingual advocates. But it’s probably not true. As I detailed in an essay for The American Conservative last year, researchers have struggled to replicate the positive results from previous studies of bilingualism. Many are now skeptical that a “bilingual advantage” exists at all.

new meta-analysis published in Psychological Bulletin provides more reason for doubt. The authors averaged the results of 152 studies and found little evidence that bilingualism confers any general cognitive benefit. So what happened to all of the exciting “bilingual advantage” research that we hear so much about? When the authors of the meta-analysis compared effect sizes across the various studies, they found that the most imprecise studies — imprecise in the sense that their small sample sizes introduced a lot of random error — tended to report the most positive results. This is classic evidence of publication bias, whereby shaky studies are more likely to be published if they produce results that go in a favored direction. After correction for publication bias, the effects of bilingualism on cognitive inhibition, monitoring, shifting, and working memory were all effectively zero. Effects on attention and verbal fluency were actually negative, albeit small.

“The idea that bilinguals outperform monolinguals in cognitive control functions seems to have already been accepted by the popular media and educators, because of a number of influential studies reporting a bilingual advantage,” the authors write. “Our thorough meta-analysis, however, suggests that healthy bilingual adults do not have such a cognitive control advantage.”

The broader lesson here is to beware of the “objective” answer to a fundamentally political question. For years the debate over bilingual education hinged on our subjective preferences for assimilation versus multiculturalism. Bilingual advocates short-circuited that debate, arguing in effect: “You may be worried about assimilation, but forget about it because Science says bilingual education makes people smarter. You’re not against Science, are you?” As we now know, science says no such thing. But the damage is already done, as English immersion is no longer the default pedagogy in the Golden State.

Jason Richwine — Jason Richwine is a public-policy analyst and a contributor to National Review Online.

Most Popular

White House

What Is Hillary Clinton Thinking?

When Homer Simpson looks in the mirror, he sees ripped chest muscles and arms like the trunks of beech trees. When Hillary Clinton looks in the mirror, she sees America’s sweetheart. She thinks: America adores me. She thinks: America already chose me to be president once! She thinks: Everyone is comparing me ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Grassley’s Kangaroo Court

So now it looks like next Thursday. On Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s manifestly meritorious nomination to the Supreme Court, what was supposed to be the vote out of the Senate Judiciary Committee this past Thursday now appears to be sliding into a hearing to be held next Thursday. Or, who knows, maybe a Thursday ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Censure Dianne Feinstein

Regardless of the fate of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, the Senate should censure the ranking Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein. Her deception and maneuvering, condemned across the political spectrum, seriously interfered with the Senate’s performance of its constitutional duty to ... Read More
U.S.

Are We on the Verge of Civil War?

Americans keep dividing into two hostile camps. It seems the country is back to 1860 on the eve of the Civil War, rather than in 2018, during the greatest age of affluence, leisure, and freedom in the history of civilization. The ancient historian Thucydides called the civil discord that tore apart the ... Read More