A California teacher in a successful Structured English Program criticizes Keith Baker's November 1998 article's inaccuracies. Baker fails to recognize that gains of immersion and early-exit students in David Ramirez's study are not sustained over time. Also, he erroneously compares study results of defined and ill-defined programs. (MLH)

Keith Baker's claims in his November 1998 article on Structured English Immersion are based on unpublished data. There are no data showing that all-English structured immersion programs are superior to well-constructed programs that include literacy development and subject-matter teaching in the child's first language. (12 references) (MLH)

Meier and Krashen, both employed in California's education system, do an injustice to students in rehashing an already settled battle. Fed up with two decades of failure, California voters replaced bilingual education with structured English immersion. Meier and Krashen offer no suggestions for coping with Proposition 227. (27 references) (MLH)

In discussing the problems of evaluating Canadian bilingual immersion programs, six related aspects are separately considered: (1) the research design, (2) the students tested, (3) the nature of the tests used, (4) the methods of analysis employed, and (5) the interpretation of findings. (Author/SJL)

Critiques the Ramirez et al. study of bilingual programs for its serious research flaws. Calls into question the findings of no consistent difference in the achievement of language-minority children regardless of how much Spanish or English is used in instruction. Proposes a reanalysis of the Ramirez data. (KS)

Reviews the reported findings and implications of the Ramirez et al. study. Examines the validity of the operational definitions of the program types and the degree of implementation of the models. Discusses the seven major findings of the study, and some possibly misleading conclusions. (KS)