Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS IN THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE

CLASSROOM

A Research Project
Presented to the
Faculty of the School of Education
Viterbo University

______________________________________
Jennifer Gallagher, PhD Candidate
Research Advisor

______________________________________
Susan R. Hughes, Ed. D.
Coordinator of Graduate Research in Education

Glena Temple, Ph. D.

Vice President for Academic Affairs
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Education
By
CoraLynn Gray
July, 2016

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

Abstract
This study examined whether students performance was affected through full immersion in a
target foreign language in the classroom. This study also examined whether immersion affected
students performance on speaking ability, written testing, and how students perceived their
progress throughout the implementation. This study was done with Spanish students from a
suburban Iowa school. Immersion requires participation from both teacher and students in order
for it to work, therefore students were to use the target language with the structures, grammar,
and vocabulary they knew at all times. Both the pre and post-immersion implementation lasted a
total of six weeks. The results of this study showed an increase in the areas of speaking ability,
written testing, and student confidence in learning a foreign language. Other related studies for
the future that would be beneficial are pre and post-implementation for a semester long class, or
full immersion of the entire year starting on the first day.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

The Effects of Immersion through TPR and TPRS in the Foreign Language Classroom
Introduction
When students decide to take a foreign language, many do not realize how crucial it is to
hear and use the language on a daily basis. As a Spanish teacher, I see many students come into
class and assume that all they have to do is memorize vocabulary and grammar structures, and
that will be enough to learn the target language. When I see this happening in my class, it
saddens me. Students take a language because in todays ever-changing world, you need not only
to understand the language, but speak and use it on a daily basis. I see this at both of the levels
that I teach: 7th grade Exploratory and high school Spanish Level One. Many of the students are
intelligent and are more than capable of higher-order thinking and speaking in the target
language. Students are able to do all the work, presentations, and forming of the language;
however I believe that they could be challenged in using the language daily. Thus, my inspiration

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

for this action research paper was wondering if making a class immersed in the target language
through using TPR and TPRS would affect students performance.
Immersion has been proven through many different methods to raise student speaking
and writing proficiency. One such method is called Total Physical Response (TPR) and another is
called Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling (TPRS). With immersion the
instruction and learning is completely in the foreign language, such as Spanish. When immersion
is used in a classroom, students are better able to hear the language in context with actions and
props used by the teacher. The students will also be able to be more fluent when speaking. When
students hear the language and are required to speak it in an immersed classroom, they will
remember the structures, wording, and inflection (American Council of Teaching Foreign
Language, 2015). Immersion in the classroom challenges students to step up their level of
fluency and achieve the American Council of Teaching Foreign Languages (ACTFL) standards
for level 1 Spanish at a faster pace. Students in immersed classrooms have had higher scores and
have fewer struggles in the upper levels of Spanish (ACTFL, 2015).
Problem Statement
The main problem that I was experiencing in my practice was that previous efforts to get
students to use Spanish in regular and authentic ways were not successful. Although, many
students were succeeding in the curriculum, I felt they could be pushed further towards fluency.
Si adelante no vas, altrasars or He who does not advance, goes backwards is an old Spanish
proverb. The students were not using Spanish as much as they could be during class. They were
only doing what they had to in order to get by and pass the class to move on, so they would not
have to take it later on in their lives or careers.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

Additionally, many students were getting bored and would finish things quickly. They
were moving through the information and acquiring the language slower than they should be
because students were becoming apathetic in their learning. I had to find a way to make the
students sit up and pay attention. I want them to want to participate and use what students had
learned already to increase their acquisition of the target language. I dont want them to sit there
and wait for the end of class, get the homework to do, and forget about it. I dont want them to
learn and memorize it for as long as they need to for the test, then forget about it forever.
Purpose Statement
My goal was to make sure that the students are moving towards fluency in Spanish. I
also wanted them to feel comfortable enough to interact with the language by using it
themselves. In doing this, students will become more proficient in reading, writing, and speaking
in Spanish.
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the impact of full Spanish
immersion on students Spanish fluency skills. I wanted to see the effects immersion has on
speaking abilities in class through oral assessments, writing assessments, and to see if their selfperceptions in Spanish changed after I implemented immersion.
Research Questions and Sub-Questions
Based on the problem of finding a better way to get the students to use the Spanish
language more often and my desire to study if immersion better enhances student learning, I
designed my study to address the following overarching question: Will making a class immersed
in the target language through using TPR and TPRS, affect students performance in Spanish? In

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

addition to the primary question for the study, I identified and posed several sub-questions that
included: (a) What is the effect on speaking ability? (b) What is the effect on written testing? and
(c) What is the impact on students perceptions of their progress and the immersion experience?
Definitions
For this research study to take place, students will be fully immersed in Spanish.
Immersion will be defined as concentrating on one manner of instruction intensively; a state of
being deeply involved and engaged in the learning the Spanish language to communicate. When
students are looking at and reflecting on their progress in the class, this will be referred to as
student perception of progress. This is defined as a students opinion of how confident he or she
feels when speaking, reading, writing, and understanding the lesson and resources that were
given during class in Spanish.
Testing or Assessments during this action research took many forms. This term will be
defined as assessments of the Spanish language through reading, writing, speaking, and listening,
based on the standards of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.
Proficient will be defined as describing the tasks that students should be able to do at level 1 with
reading, writing, speaking, and listening.
Reading proficiency as defined by ACTFL is that readers are able to understand, fully and
with relative ease, key words and cognates, as well as formulaic phrases. They are able to derive
meaning from short, non-complex texts that convey basic information.
Written proficiency as defined by ACTFL is that students are able to meet limited basic
practical writing needs using lists, short messages, postcards, and simple notes. They are able to

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

express themselves within the context in which the language was learned, practiced material, and
common elements of daily life. They are able to recombine learned vocabulary and structures to
create simple sentences on very familiar topics.
Listening proficiency as defined by ACTFL is that listeners are often but not always able
to understand information from sentence-length speech, one utterance at a time, in basic personal
and social contexts.
Speaking proficiency as defined by ACTFL is that students are able to manage
successfully a number of uncomplicated communicative tasks in straightforward social
situations. Conversation is restricted to a few of the predictable topics necessary for survival in
the target language culture, they can respond to simple questions or requests for information, and
they are able to ask a few questions. Their speech consists of short and sometimes incomplete
sentences in the present, and may be hesitant or inaccurate. Pronunciation, vocabulary, and
syntax may be strongly influenced by the first language.
Limitations
I acknowledge that a number of factors may have affected the results of my research.
First, my action research included a sample of convenience, therefore, the sample was not
randomized. Therefore, my results will not be generalizable to a larger population of high school
Spanish students. This was also the first time that I used the immersion methods, therefore my
inexperience may have been a limitation. I also believe that the length of the time the study took
place was a limitation because it may not have been a sufficient amount of time to allow for
student growth to be measured accurately.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

Review of Literature
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of full Spanish immersion on
students Spanish fluency skills. I wanted to see the effects immersion had on students speaking
ability in the class and on verbal assessments, writing assessments, and if comprehension of
Spanish changed after I implemented the immersion model. Teachers struggle with how to
incorporate immersion into their daily curriculum even though many teachers know that
immersion is the best model for students learning a foreign language.
I designed this study to address the following overarching question: Will classroom
immersion in the target language affect students performance in Spanish? In addition to the
primary question for the study I identified and posed several sub-questions that included: (a)
What are the effects of immersion on students Spanish speaking ability? (b) What are the effects
of immersion on students Spanish writing ability? and (c) What is the impact of immersion on
students perceptions of their progress in learning Spanish? The literature review discusses each
of the following topics related to this studys questions: (1) Immersion and second language
development, (2) Immersion and reading and writing fluency, (3) Impact on students perception
of their progress and the immersion experience, and (4) Effects of immersion strategies on
learning.
Immersion and Second Language Development
The immersion model has been integrated in schools since the 1960s and has grown in
usage significantly since the 1990s. Research has shown that the earlier you can start an
immersion program the better impact it will have on students in learning a foreign language.
When a class is taught entirely in the target language in a classroom, students have a higher

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

flexibility in their thinking along with better higher order thinking and problem solving skills
(Chamot, 2004). It has also been shown through research that no matter when you implement
immersion in a classroom, it will have the same effects as if you have been doing it all year
(Muoz, 2012). There was a study done in Quebec (De Jong & Howard, 2009) that compared
different models of intensive foreign language instruction. Students were first given a pretest to
see what their learning had been when the class was done in their native language with some
foreign language utilized. The students had 90 minutes per week of foreign language during an
intervention period of the study. By the end of their intensive immersion experience, there was
quite a large difference between these students and another group representing a bilingual
classroom.
When students from this study were in the immersion classroom, they were working
within the language doing many tasks involving reading, writing, speaking, and listening. They
were doing classwork, partner or individual work, hand-on learning, and even repetitive learning
with actions. When they were given the reading, writing, listening, and speaking assessments
again as a post-test, it showed that the students in the immersion class had more use with the
language and could show their knowledge more accurately than the other groups of students
(Muoz, 2012). Through research on immersion it has also been shown that switching to
English, even though it is the natural thing to do, limits the types of opportunities for the students
to use a wider range of language functions and it could slow their foreign language development
(De Jong & Howard, 2009).
For immersion programs as a whole this means that assessment has to be done in a
consistent and systematic way and it must be aligned with appropriate standards and goals.
Along with assessment accuracy, professional development must be provided to teachers in order

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

10

to more easily help their students. This lets teachers develop, collect, and interpret the immersion
assessment data appropriately and accurately.
Lindholm-Leary (2001) pointed out in her research on effective immersion programs that
optimal input has four characteristics in the classroom and with assessments. Those
characteristics of immersion are: 1) it is adjusted to the comprehension level of the learner, 2) it
is interesting and relevant, there is sufficient quantity, and 3) it is challenging. In the early stages
of second language acquisition, input is made more comprehensible though the use of slower,
more expanded, simplified, and repetitive speech oriented to the here and now. Immersion
must also be highly contextualized in language and gestures, but also have comprehension
checks. It is crucial in an immersion classroom that the communication be structured to provide
scaffolding for meaning by students when learning new material (Lindholm-Leary, 2001).
Students who keep portfolios of their work and their perception of progress show greater
improvement and knowledge of how to better help themselves learn and practice in the target
language. Immersion classrooms have also been researched to show that the more different
materials and wide presentation strategies will help students focus on what the content is and be
able to more effectively use the language both in class and while testing (Alans, Rodrguez,
2008). Having these types of assessment and reflection are able to make the student look back
and reflect on how their past way of learning effects their future way. They are able to more
easily look at their work and see what needs to be done to improve their work and knowledge.
In this same study done in an immersion classroom by Lindholm-Leary, schools that have
a higher effectiveness and success rate in their testing had many of the same characteristics as
explained by teachers, students, parents, and administration. The characteristics that identified as
the four main factors to the success and sustainability of the immersion language program were

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

11

(a) pedagogical equity, (b) effective bilingual teachers, (c) active parent participation, (d)
knowledgeable leadership and continuity (Alans, Rodrguez, 2008).
Immersion and Reading and Writing Development
Studies on immersion have shown that the effectiveness of even a novice-level speaker
providing instruction has elevated outcomes in fluency. This is because they are hearing the
language during the entire class period along with speaking, reading, and writing it themselves.
One such study was done at George Mason University by Collier and Thomas (2004). Their
research of immersion programs was done over 18 years with different schools that had the
program implemented.
At the beginning, it was found that in the mainstream classrooms, in many schools
included in this research, the curriculum was watered downs in both the instruction and the
learning of the language. Many students were not being challenged and were bored with what
they were learning and others were confused or not paying attention. Most of the teaching was
done in the native language, and switched over to Spanish when it was something they should
already know. Dual language enrichment models were introduced into the curriculum by having
the language taught in the actual foreign language completely. Teachers in these bilingual classes
created the cognitive challenge through thematic units of the core academic curriculum and put a
focus on real-world problem solving that stimulated students to make progress in the language.
With no translation and no repeated lessons in the native language, separation of the languages
was a key component of this model. Peer teaching and classroom teachers using cooperative
learning strategies to capitalize on this effect serve as an important stimulus for the cognitive
challenge (Collier & Thomas, 2004).

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

12

There were two types of classrooms going on at the time of research. One that was
bilingual and the other was implemented as an immersion program. One of the aspects that was
looked at was the percentage in speaking proficiency gaps of the students in the Spanish
classroom over four years. Students at a school in Texas who were in the bilingual classroom
started at 40% proficiency went to a 47% proficiency rate. Students who went from the native
taught bilingual curriculum to an immersion program started at a 40% speaking proficiency in
fluency and went to a 62% speaking proficiency rate in fluency (Collier & Thomas, 2004).
The Impact on Students Perception of their Progress and the Immersion Experience
The use of the immersion model to teach a second language can have a significant impact
on students perceptions of their ability to learn. When students develop confidence in using the
new language in a safe environment, this can lead to higher levels of learning. Bandura (1992)
said:
Self-efficacious learners feel confident about solving a problem because they have
developed an approach to problem solving that has worked in the past. They
attribute their success mainly to their own efforts and strategies, believe that their
own abilities will improve as they learn more, and recognize that errors are a part
of learning. Students with low self-efficacy, on the other hand, believe themselves
to have inherent low ability, choose less demanding tasks on which they will
make few errors, and do not try hard because they believe that any effort will
reveal their own lack of ability. (Bandura, 1992)
In any foreign language classroom, especially one that is immersion based, it is important to
teach the students how to use their errors to increase their learning, and come up with strategies
to help them figure out what needs to be done in class (Chamot, 2004). Students who show a

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

13

greater knowledge of learning strategies will help them learn another language more easily and
they perceive themselves to be more effective language learners. The students who use selfefficacy and strategies for reading, listening, speaking, and writing also show they have a higher
level of confidence in what they are doing (Chamot, 2004).
Researchers have discovered various reasons for students reluctance to speak in second
language learning classrooms such as: (1) the fear of losing face, (2) being laughed at, (3) low
proficiency in the target language, (4) previous negative experiences with speaking in class, (5)
cultural beliefs about appropriate behavior in classroom contexts such as showing respect to the
teacher by being quiet, (6) habits they have developed like becoming used to a passive role in the
classroom, (7) personality traits, and (8) lack of confidence (Doquaruni, 2014).
Doquaruni (2014), found that many of his students would not talk during class and did
not seem confident when called on. So he posed the question, What skill do you want to
improve the most on?. Most of the students replied with speaking skills, meaning that wanted to
speak and practice the language but they just were not confident enough to express what they
wanted. Students who study a second language study have an enhanced sense of achievement.
Foreign language study is an area where children not accustomed to achievement in school are
able to excel. The resulting benefits to self-image, self-esteem and satisfaction with school
experience are enormous. Evidence from several studies show language students to have a
significantly higher self-concept than non-language students (Masciantonio, Saunders, Andrade,
1998).
1

The above statement is not only true for native English speakers who are learning a new
language, but also for English as a Second Language (ESL) who are learning a new
language. Language study is an area in which ESL students can be successful in front of

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

14

their peers, since bilingual children often learn additional languages more quickly and
efficiently than monolingual children. Offering foreign language study demonstrates to
ESL students and their families that languages other than English, and by extension
cultures other than the mainstream, are valued. Research suggests that foreign language
study enhances childrens understanding of how language itself works. It also increases
their ability to manipulate language in the service of thinking and problem solving"
(Cummins 1990).
2

In yet another study at a secondary school in Florida, students were asked about their
experiences and perceptions of their progress within their immersion program. This
research study looked at three different themes including: (1) students attitudes toward
the program, (2) students attitudes toward bilingualism and biculturalism, and (3)
linguistic equity. Students indicated their agreement with statements that linked
bilingualism with communication, education, and their future careers.
The students acknowledged that the instrumental purpose of learning Spanish was for

college and future job opportunities no comma and that being in an immersion classroom helped
them to feel more comfortable with the language (Bearse & De Jong, 2008).
Immersion Strategies
When working and studying immersion strategies that could be used in the classroom, Dr.
Lindholm-Leary (2012) said:
Research shows that effective programs utilize a number of approaches that can help
promote higher levels of bilingualism. These programs have a vision and goals that have
language instruction integrated within the curriculum, and that language immersion is

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

15

developed across the curriculum to ensure that students learn the content as well as the
academic language associated with the content. (p. 7)
Lindholm-Leary (2012) also found that immersion provides both structured and unstructured
opportunities for oral production. Immersion classrooms establish and enforce a strong language
policy that encourages students to use the instructional language and discourages students from
speaking the non-instructional language. Lindholm-Leary (2012) determined that it is crucial that
immersion classrooms utilize grouping strategies to optimize student interactions and language
practice and that teachers are provided with professional development focused on the immersion
model and second language learning strategies (Lindholm-Leary, 2012).
One such way of doing so is to use Total Physical Response (TPR) or Teaching
Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling (TPRS). TPR is a language teaching method
developed by James Asher, a professor at San Jos State University. This language teaching
method was developed in 1977 and is based on the coordination of language and physical
movement. Ashers (1977) emphasis on developing comprehension skills before the learner is
taught to speak linked him to a movement in foreign language teaching sometimes referred to as
the Comprehension Approach. Asher (2013) believed that skills acquired through listening
transfer to other skills, that teaching should emphasize meaning rather than form, and teaching
should minimize learner stress (Asher, 2013).
TPRS is a method of teaching languages with interactive oral stories and readings. This
method was developed by Blaine Ray in 1990. Students learn the language by listening and
understanding, which then results in fluency in speaking the language. This method of second
language teaching uses highly-interactive stories to develop comprehension and create
immersion in the classroom (Ray, 2015).

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

16

When using these two methods in classes that are incorporating immersion, students feel
like they are confident and learning quickly. Students feel like they can interact and relate to the
stories and actions, and they do not have to sit in their desks as the teacher talks and gives the
instruction for the day. TPR and TPRS uses gestures, actions, stories, visuals, sounds, and songs
that go with everything needed to keep students reading, writing, listening, and speaking in
Spanish.
An action research study by Jakubowski in 2013 used TPRS instruction along with
visuals in a classroom for immersion. First the students were given a pretest group one received
an average 41.7% and the other group an average of 43.3%. One group of students received
traditional instruction and the other group was taught through TPRS.
In the end of the instruction both with and without TPRS and visuals, in the final posttest
the first group received an average of 84.3% and group two received an average of 87.4%
overall. This action research showed that immersion is an effective way for a foreign language
classroom to be run, but it is even better for the student when it is combined with visuals and
TPRS or TPR.
Conclusion
There is strong evidence in research indicating that teaching students in an immersion
classroom setting is crucial and beneficial to learning a second language. The purpose of my
study was to determine the impact of full Spanish immersion on students fluency skills in
speaking ability, writing, and the impact on students perceptions of their progress. The research
reviewed demonstrated that students benefit from using the target language in all possible ways,
such as speaking, reading, writing, listening, to get the most out of understanding it. Over many
years, multiple theories and strategies have been researched in immersion and show that effective

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

17

language instruction has to have high levels of meaningful communication and interactive
feedback in the target language so students can develop language and cultural proficiency
(Crouse, 2012).
Foreign language teachers and the students who use the target language as much as
possible during instructional time, use multiple strategies to help students with comprehension
and support them in making meaning of what they are learning. These strategies in the classroom
also help students to create meaning with body language, gestures, and visual support. It also
increases speaking ability in fluency, accuracy, and complexity when used consistently during
class time. Immersion also encourages students to use these strategies and create spontaneous use
of language applying what they have learned both in and out of the classroom. Immersion is
beneficial for students because it also holds them accountable for their learning. It teaches the
students to ask for clarification when they have problems with comprehension. Through this,
teachers are able to give feedback to help improve their students abilities to use oral
communication correctly in the target language.
Methods
Introduction
This descriptive mixed-methods action research study used both quantitative and
qualitative data to examine how immersion in a target language when using TPR and TPRS
affects students overall performance. I also investigated (a) What are the effects on speaking
ability? (b) What are the effects on written testing? and (c) How does immersion affect students
perceptions of their progress in their speaking, writing, and comprehension of Spanish?
Participants

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

18

The participants for this action research study were high school level Spanish students,
both male and female, ranging from 15 - 18 years of age from a suburban high school in the
Midwest. All students in the district have had Spanish in elementary school, twice a week for 30
minutes each time. However, their post-elementary experiences with Spanish vary. Some
participants had not taken Spanish since seventh, eighth, or ninth grade, meaning they had
anywhere from one to three years without practicing the foreign language. Two of the
participants had previously failed Spanish 1 and were retaking it. Additionally, there were five
participants who were new students to the district and had not had any experience with a foreign
language. Lastly, there were six participants who have been identified as having special needs
and had IEPs and four students with other types of accommodations.
Procedure
During first semester Spanish Class, I used 90% Spanish and 10% English when needed.
If I was getting confused looks from the students, I would switch to English and then say it again
in Spanish so they would understand the next time. I did not have any props at this time, but did
use many actions to get the points across.
At the end of first semester, I collected data on students overall performance. Their
speaking ability, their written testing, and their self-perceptions of their progress in Spanish were
assessed. For overall performance, I collected their semester grade percentage and averaged it
per class. For speaking ability, I collected the total points of all of the individual students
conversational speaking and oral presentations and determined the group mean percentage. For
written testing, I collected scores on all written quizzes and tests and averaged them for a whole
class mean from that semester. For self-perceptions of their Spanish progress, I collected a selfassessment which had students reflect on their experience, participation, connections, strategies,

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

19

culture, best work, and if the objectives of the semester were met. All of the data from the first
semester Spanish was taken in order to get baseline data for student performance prior to the
immersion intervention.
During the time frame of January through March, the immersion intervention was applied
to the classroom. I was speaking in the target language of Spanish 100% of the time with no
English used whatsoever. During instruction I used many props and actions. These could include
anything from actual examples from the country, acting something out, and using exaggerated
gestures to raise the size, quality, quantity, or types of responses from the students in class. If
students became incredibly confused or stuck on what I was trying to convey, I broke the lesson
and information down into even smaller pieces. Once this was done, I would also give examples
that would better relate to the student at that time.
Another type of instruction I used with immersion is called TPR or total physical
response, along with TPRS or total physical response storytelling. TPR is where a teacher uses
different types of actions and gestures to demonstrate something the class is learning. The
students then act out the same thing the teacher does so as to learn what the topic, word, or
phrase means while doing it at the same time. This part of the immersion instruction gradually
provided more information for topics, vocabulary for the whole year, and also commands that
both student and teacher could use. During this time, students were also required to speak as
much of the language as they were able to based on their current knowledge from first semester
and also prior knowledge from elementary, if that applied.
TPRS was a type of instruction that takes the vocabulary, grammar, prior and current
knowledge, actions used during class, cultural information from Spanish speaking countries, and
information from the topics of the lesson or chapter and puts it into story form. These stories

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

20

were provided by the company from whom we get our resources. These stories used all the
information the students were getting in class and placed them into real life situations that the
students could relate to. The stories were first read by students as a group of three or less or
individually. The story was then re-read by me using exaggerated actions and gestures in a whole
class setting. I would then ask the students personalized questions about the reading to see how
much was understood. I would then discuss the story and the information with the class and then
split them into groups to retell the story in their own words.
For the speaking part of immersion, the students had to use the target language with the
structures and wording they knew. They could not speak or ask questions in English during class
time. However, they could ask me in Spanish how to say something they did not know how to
say. The writing part of immersion in class made students put into practice the information they
were gaining from instruction. Students were required to use the structures and vocabulary from
class in their homework, their TPRS writings, and their warmups and exit slips of the day.
Students also had to use the correct writing skills in Spanish on their regular chapter tests and
quizzes throughout the semester. Immersion requires participation from both teacher and students
in order for it to work. During class time, we would speak and write in the target language for
practice and review in order for the students to be better prepared for an oral assessment or
presentation as well as a written assessments.
At the end of the intervention period, I collected data on students performance on
speaking ability, written testing, and students perceptions of their performance as a whole. For
speaking ability, I collected total points for oral presentations and oral exams at the end of the
six-week intervention. I also looked at the effects of immersion on written testing. To collect this
type of data, I took all of the assessments from the six-week intervention and looked at it as a

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

21

total average percentage per student, then averaged per class. These assessments had multiple
choice, true/false, fill in the blank, and sentence writing. All assessments showed data on how the
students were able to properly use the vocabulary and grammar structures.
For student perceptions, I collected self-assessments and reflections at the end of the sixweek intervention. In the reflection, students looked back on what they learned best and how,
what they struggled with and why, what could have helped them increase the knowledge, and
what they could change in the future in regard to learning Spanish. I had students do this
reflection at the end of the six-weeks to compare their learning and language acquisition from
first semester to after the intervention.
Overall, I used group mean scores in speaking and writing for first semester to find out if
immersion in the target language affected students progress. I also looked at all of the data from
first semester and compared this to the time of the six-week intervention to see if immersion
affected each student by semester.
Research Design
I designed this mixed-method study of qualitative and quantitative data to determine
whether immersion in the target language of Spanish affects student performance. In order to do
this I took first semester grades and compared them to the grades after the six-week intervention
using group mean scores. In order to address sub-question 1, how immersion impacted speaking
ability, I used the mean scores for the oral exams and presentations the students took and
compared these averages tfrom first semester to second semester. For sub-question 2, how
immersion impacted written testing, the assessments from first semester were compared to the
group mean following the immersion intervention. Lastly, in order to investigate sub-question 3,
how immersion affects students perception of their progress, the students filled out a self-

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

22

reflection on their perceptions of Spanish class in first semester without the intervention. Once
the six-week intervention was over, they filled out another self-reflection on their perceptions
about Spanish class following the intervention. I then compared those pre and post student
reflections to see what they thought about immersion and the progress the students made.
Data Analysis
The quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics. I compared the class
average of all students percentages from second quarter pre-intervention to their average
percentage of third quarter post-intervention. Next, I compared the class average percentages in
the subcategories of written and oral testing. I compared the changes in this percentage from
second quarter to third quarter following the intervention.
The qualitative student reflections were coded for emergent themes in students selfperceptions of their learning. Differences in pre and post intervention reflections were compared.
The students filled out an open-ended self-reflection about their perceptions of learning progress
during the intervention. I used inductive coding to look for themes of what each student was
saying to make comparisons between their self-perceptions pre-intervention and post
intervention.
Results
Introduction
Based on the problem of wanting a better way to get my Spanish students to use and hear
the language more often and my desire to study if immersion better enhances student learning, I
designed my study to address the following overarching question: Will making a class immersion
in the target language when using TPR and TPRS affect students performance in Spanish? In
addition to the primary question for the study, I identified and posed several sub-questions that

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

23

included: (a) What are the effects on speaking ability? (b) What is the effect on testing? and (c)
What is the impact on students perception of their progress and the immersion experience?
The Effects of Immersion on Students Performance
Figure 1 shows the effects of the immersion on students overall performance. The
number of students for both the end of first semester and beginning of 2nd semester were 53
students total; 27 in one class and 26 in the other. The two-class average prior to the immersion
intervention study 81.99 %. The two-class average after the study was 84.32%. The difference
between pre and post immersion implementation was 2.33%.

EFFECTS OF IMMERSION ON STUDENTS' PERFORMANCE

90

80

CLASS % AVERAGE
70

81.9

84.32

60

SEMESTER 1

SEMESTER 2

Figure 1. This graph identifies the effects on students (N-53) performance without the
immersion implementation as compared to with the implementation.
The Effects on Students Speaking Ability
Figure 2 shows the results of the number of students for both the end of first semester and
beginning of 2nd semester 53 students total; 27 in one class and 26 in the other. The two-class

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

24

average prior to the immersion intervention study 73.2 %. The two-class average after the study
was 76.4%. The difference between pre and post immersion implementation was 3.2%.

EFFECTS ON SPEAKING ABILITY

80
75

CLASS % AVERAGE 70
76.4
65

73.2

60

SEMESTER 1

SEMESTER 2

Figure 2. This graph identifies the effects on students speaking ability without the
immersion implementation as compared to with the implementation.
The Effects on Written Testing
Figure 3 shows the results of the class average of testing prior to implementation was
73.5%. The class average after implementation was 80.4%. The difference between pre and post
immersion implementation was 6.9%.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

25

EFFECTS ON WRITTEN TESTING

85

80

CLASS % AVERAGE

75

80.4

70
73.5

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

26

Figure 3. This graph identifies the impact of immersion teaching with TPR and TPRS on
the students written testing.
The Impact on Students Perception of their Progress and the Immersion Experience
Several themes emerged to answer the question of how the immersion impacted students
perceptions of their own progress. For this section I used inductive coding to find themes in the
student reflections. When looking through the student self-reflections pre-intervention, there
were a couple of themes that became evident.
One theme was that there were many reluctant feelings. The most frequent things that my
students said that they were very nervous about going to an immersion classroom of learning.
Many said that they would probably shut down when they didnt understand something or they
had no idea what my actions or props were trying to help with. I noticed that they were very
scared to change how they had been learning this year, even though I had explained we would be
doing immersion through using TPR and TPRS. One student even said that they thought
immersion was going to make it harder because I wont understand what youre saying without
some English. Will there be visuals and repetitions?
The other theme that came out of the inductive coding was that the students were nervous
about how I would be delivering the immersion. For example, the students were worried that I
as teacher would be a) talking too fast, b) using a thick accent, c) were scared I would rush
through things now that it was full immersion, and d) not help them at all or let them ask
questions. Some things the students wrote were, Please dont speak super-fast like you probably
can since you know it better than us! and Can you make your Spanish sound sort of American?
(Does that make sense?) I had no idea how worried they were about it even though they were
high-achieving students and could adapt to many situations.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

27

At the end of the six-week implementation period I had the students complete another
self-reflection. This time around the theme that emerged was that more students said they
learned the lessons much easier if they paid attention to my props and gestures along with what
I was saying. Students said in their post intervention reflections that they actually practiced
and used the language in and outside of class. The students said that the visuals and gestures
were incredibly helpful to them when having the lessons taught to them. They realized that I was
speaking at a regular or slower pace and would repeat if needed when it was something
important. I also used the many props, gestures, pictures, and even students themselves as props
to get the information across.
In this post intervention self-reflection, another theme that emerged was that students said
they became more confident when using actions and gestures while also speaking. One student
said that At first I thought it was dumb and lame that we had to use actions when speaking and
practicing in class. But when it came to assessments and doing Spanish, it made it easier for me
to remember what I had to do. A few other students also said the same thing, along the lines of,
At first I thought it was super weird seeing all the props and watching you jump and move
around. But then I realized when practicing later that I remember what you were doing or what
the class had to do for that information and it wasnt harder to get the answer done.
Discussion
Introduction
The early ideas for my study grew out of a concern for my Spanish I students and their
fluency in the target language. The main problem that I was experiencing was that previous
efforts to get students to use Spanish in a regular and authentic way were not successful. Many
students were succeeding in the curriculum, but I felt they could be pushed further towards

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

28

fluency. I wanted them to be using Spanish as much as they could while in class. I did not want
them doing only what they had to in order to get by and pass the class to move on. Additionally,
many students were getting bored and would finish things quickly. I had to find a way to make
the students want to participate and use what they had learned already to increase their
acquisition of the target language.
My goal was to make sure that the students were moving towards fluency in Spanish. I
also wanted them to feel comfortable enough to interact with the language by using it
themselves. In doing this, I hoped that students would become more proficient in reading,
writing, and speaking in Spanish. The purpose of this action research study was to determine the
impact of full Spanish immersion on my students Spanish fluency skills. I wanted to see the
effects immersion had on their speaking ability in class and on assessments, on writing
assessments, and the in comprehension of Spanish after the implementation immersion.
The Effects of Immersion on Students Performance
The results indicate immersion had a positive effect on students overall performance.
This is somewhat surprising given how the intervention started with my students. For the
immersion implementation as a whole, one factor that I worried about the students would shut
down and not even try. This did happen when it was first implemented and we had a talk about
how it was something that they would need to attempt because this was what our World
Languages program is going towards. I talked with them and showed them different information
about how immersion improves speaking proficiency and written assessments. Some were still
skeptical that it would really help them and were afraid they would now fail if they didnt
understand.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

29

A limitation I had with this is that I didnt know if students may have been getting extra
help from somewhere such as a tutor, friends, some added program, or another Spanish teacher
in the building. Another variable that could have affected the increase was that it was second
semester. At this point the students know what needs to be done for them to study and know the
material. They could have been adding extra time to what they already had been doing. The
students had had half a year of being in the class learning Spanish.
As I stated before, Lindholm-Leary (2001) pointed out in her research on effective
immersion programs that optimal input has four characteristics in the classroom and with
assessments. Those characteristics of immersion are: 1) it is adjusted to the comprehension level
of the learner, 2) it is interesting and relevant, 3) there is sufficient quantity, and 4) it is
challenging. Keeping these characteristics in mind when doing my lesson plans really helped me
to fit the immersion to my students level of learning and knowledge with Spanish. It also made
them feel more comfortable knowing that I was not going to suddenly jump to a higher level of
Spanish than they really knew. My hope for the future is to implement immersion right away to
see if this enhances all aspects that are talked about in my sub-questions below.
The Effects of Students Speaking Ability
One factor that I had been worried about was their ability to use the target language in a
discussion or real world situation. As stated earlier, Lindholm-Leary (2012) found that
immersion provides both structured and unstructured opportunities for oral production.
Immersion classrooms establish and enforce a strong language policy that encourages students to
use the instructional language and discourages students from speaking the non-instructional
language. The results indicated that the students speaking ability improved by having the
immersion implementation. By using physical responses to aid in grammar structure, vocabulary,

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

30

and memory, my students were able to have more confidence when speaking in the target
language. I believe this is true because they had been practicing so much more and were required
to use the target language during class time, not just in preparing for an assessment of project
presentation.
One limitation to this result is that I had no way of knowing if this intervention increased
their speaking ability or if there were other variables. One variable that could have affected the
increase was that it was second semester. The students had had half a year of being in the class
learning Spanish. They could be used to me speaking the Spanish that I normally had in class and
used what they originally done earlier in the year to get what they needed. Again, my hope for
the future in this aspect is to implement this right at the beginning of next year to see if this
makes their speaking abilities used more often and if they can have more fluent and frequent
conversations without being scared.
Just like in the action research study done by Jakubowski in 2013 that used TPRS
instruction along with visuals in a classroom for immersion, I also saw an increase in speaking
ability. These results are beneficial because it shows the students were able to better connect
what they were learning in class along with how to say it and get their points across. I was
worried they would shut down or tune out in class when hearing another language, but this
intervention made them step up and try harder to understand what was being taught. This also
tells me that they were able to make more connections with the gestures, props, and stories than
they could before with just the resource materials from the textbook company.
The Effects on Written Testing
Additionally, the impact of immersion was very high for my students written testing.
When I implemented the immersion program for six weeks, the effects on their written testing

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

31

increased. Before implementation, the group mean for my students was a 72.5%. After six weeks
of immersion, that percentage increased to an 80.4%. The students were no longer missing
conjugations, or making spelling, grammar, or context errors as much as they had previously.
Some limitations that I had here were some of my students that had a 504 or an IEP and some of
their modifications were that they could use vocabulary and notes during assessments. However,
even if you did not factor in their percentages to the average, that was still a large jump for a sixweek implementation period.
Studies on immersion have shown that the effectiveness of even a novice-level speaker
providing instruction has elevated outcomes in fluency. This is because they are hearing the
language during the entire class period along with speaking, reading, and writing it themselves.
One such study was done at George Mason University by Collier and Thomas (2004). Their
research of immersion programs was done with different schools that had the program
implemented over many years. (Collier & Thomas, 2004).
The effectiveness in the study by Collier & Thomas (2004) was also true in my classroom
with the immersion implementation. Because I had decided to go with the method of immersion,
the students were hearing and speaking Spanish consistently in the classroom during regular
class time and they were able to take that information and apply it to their testing. With the
written testing, the students did not have as many questions because we had been using written
methods with immersion. Because of this, the writing in both grammar structure and context
came naturally for them and they knew what the correct information was that should be used.
The Impact on Students Perception of their Progress and the Immersion Experience
When the students first heard we were doing an immersion implementation, they thought
I would be speaking the language at them and not helping them in any way, hoping they would

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

32

just get it. I was surprised that they thought immersion meant they would be thrown into the
implementation with no help once it was started. When the implementation started, the students
realized that I was speaking at a regular pace and would repeat if needed. Students said that they
even became more confident when they were using the actions and gestures when they were
required to speak also. This was interesting to me because I knew that actions when speaking
helped foreign language learners, but I had no idea how much more it helped when this strategy
was done during immersion. Immersion classrooms have been researched to show that the more
variety in materials and presentation strategies the more this will help students focus on what the
content is and be able to more effectively use the language both in class and while testing (Alans
& Rodrguez, 2008)
The improvement that shocked me the most during the immersion implementation was
that some students were able to go back and relearn past information from earlier in the year on a
whole new level. Many students I had talked to both formally and informally said that when they
had more actions and visuals, they could make better connections to the materials and have it
make sense. For me, this was the most incredibly positive result of the implementation.
As far as the self-reflection report the students, I think it was good the students had time
to reflect on their learning with immersion. It made me realize how nervous they actually were to
start something new during the school year. When reading their reflections, I know that I need to
start immersion right away next year. By the end, most students said they learned the lessons
much easier if they used their resources more often. These were resources such as vocabulary,
notes, my props, and gestures. These were not really anything new, but I think it gave them
comfort that I was speaking slowly and using bigger actions and visuals during class so no one
got left behind. In the final self-reflection I was impressed when a majority of the students talked

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

33

about actually practicing and using the language more in class and also outside of class when
talking to each other. They were helping each other figure out the meaning, structure, and
language better than before when I was not using the immersion implementation. Some students
even went so far as to say that they had been texting each other for extra practice.
Lastly, something that I had to help students overcome in class was being ok with making
errors during our time together. Some thought that they would be made fun of and get sarcastic
comments if they were incorrect. I had to get rid of that stigma, which was a little difficult at the
high school level. There was some reluctance, but with me in class always stopping the negative
responses from classmates and encouraging them to make mistakes and try, the students learned
that it was acceptable to make those mistakes as long as they learned from them.
One piece of literature that I found during my research stated that the use of the
immersion model to teach a second language has a significant impact on students perceptions of
their ability to learn because when students develop confidence in using the new language in a
safe environment, this can lead to higher levels of learning (Bandura, 1992). There are many
reasons that students are reluctant to speak in second language learning classrooms such as: (1)
the fear of losing face, (2) being laughed at, (3) low proficiency in the target language, (4)
previous negative experiences with speaking in class, (5) cultural beliefs about appropriate
behavior in classroom contexts such as showing respect to the teacher by being quiet, (6) habits
they have developed like becoming used to a passive role in the classroom, (7) personality traits,
and (8) lack of confidence (Doquaruni, 2014). I am very satisfied that my implementation of
immersion seemed to ease some of these students worries.
A study done by Doquaruni about reluctance in second language learning classrooms,
kept me thinking about my own. The students in his study were asked how they thought their

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

34

progress had been going from before the pre-intervention of immersion. Most students said
repeatedly that they were learning but not necessarily retaining because they were afraid to ask
questions or make a mistake in front of their peers. However, when students were asked about
how they thought their progress had been going after the intervention, there was a big change
from pre intervention. Students said they were able to make more connections from other units
to what we are doing now and that they remembered the weird stories, songs, actions, and
other stuff we did to help us figure out what we should do. They also said in various ways that
through the many weird and different methods that they felt comfortable making a mistake
because they knew that they could learn from it and they were at least trying and participating. I
believe that all the results that came of the immersion implementation benefit the students in
their acquisition of foreign language. They were more easily able to talk, write, and self-reflect
positively on themselves and learn from their mistakes.
Conclusion
My original prediction was that students would be scared and hesitant when being in an
immersed classroom but that they would improve in their performance. I also predicted that there
would be some improvement when being fully immersed. This study revealed that immersion did
scare the students at first; however, they flourished and grew in the target language in just six
weeks. By staying fully-immersed in the language at all times, students were able to properly
think, read, write, test, and become more self-aware regarding their habits of study and practice
of the language.
Conclusion and Future Implications
My goal for this action research study was to make sure that my students were moving
towards fluency in Spanish. I also want them to feel comfortable enough to interact with the

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

35

language by using it themselves. In doing this, I believed that they would become more
proficient in reading, writing, and speaking in Spanish.
The purpose of this action research study was to determine the impact of full Spanish
immersion on my students Spanish fluency skills. I want to see the effects immersion may have
on their speaking ability in class through assessments, writing assessments, and to see if their
self-perceptions in Spanish changed after I implemented immersion.
Importance of the Study
This action research study was important to me because I needed to find a way to teach
that would increase students Spanish fluency skills. I wanted to see the effects immersion had on
students speaking ability in the class and on verbal assessments, writing assessments, and
comprehension of the Spanish language. Teachers struggle with how to incorporate immersion
into their daily curriculum, even though we know that immersion is the best model for students
learning a foreign language.
These results are important because they indicate that immersion has positive results
including helping students find a new confidence in their language learning and a desire to apply
it to their world outside the classroom. They are not just learning what they need to pass the
class, but applying what they are learning. The results from this action research showed me that
when you take away the belief that learning a language involves only grammar and vocabulary,
and let the students be creative, they go above and beyond what you expect them to do and
understand. Because of the high change in understanding, speaking, and confidence indicated in
this study, this shows me that using TPR and TPRS in the classroom is more beneficial for the

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

36

students learning because they are more easily able to remember what they are taught through
movement and stories.
I was experiencing in my practice that previous efforts to get students to use Spanish in a
regular and authentic way were not successful. Although, many students were succeeding in the
curriculum, I felt they could be pushed further towards fluency. They were only doing what they
had to in order to get by and pass the class to move on, and many students were getting bored
and would finish things quickly. I didnt want them to sit there, get the homework to do, and
forget about it. The immersion implementation successfully changed that in my classroom
because the students wanted to participate and I did not have to call for volunteers as often as
before. Students were even coming up with their own plans, TPR actions, and TPRS short stories
to help them and they wanted to share them with the class. For me, having the students
participate and learn like that was the best feeling and these changes in the classroom were even
more than I could have asked for from this research.
Lessons Learned
A lesson that I learned with immersion was that you cannot hold back and wonder, What
if?. If I was holding back and thinking that my immersion implementation was not very good,
that would rub off on the students. Normally when I do something different than what is
normally done in a class, it was hard to get the students to participate. They were in a mindset of
just give me the information and we can be done. At first I was nervous to use the TPR
immersion because it would require me to use over exaggerated actions and gestures in front of
my students. Once I lost that worry of wondering if the students would buy into it, they loved it.
They learned and retained more of the information than the previous semester without the
immersion implementation.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

37

With research in general, I wish that I had more time to go back and find even more
literature evidence that supports my main question along with my sub-questions more
thoroughly. I also think that more qualitative data would be helpful in my research. If I was able
to go through and do student perceptions of progress each time we did a unit, it would give me
an idea of what types of TPR and TPRS work well with the material being learned. I could
narrow down the strategies to help the types of learners that I have. This could be helpful to do
every year since students are never the same types of learners. If this were able to happen, I
would be able to have even more methods prepared to help these students when learning the
language.
Future Implications
My hope for the future in my classroom is to keep the immersion implementation, but
start it at the beginning of the year instead of halfway through. I believe that this will better
prepare my students for assessments as they move to the higher levels of the target language. If
they started being held to the expectation of participating in immersion every day, I believe that
it will increase their ability to connect what they have learned in the class to what they are being
tested on. This became evident when they did their self-reflections for their portfolio and on their
assessments. By having this knowledge now that even just six weeks of immersion made a
difference, I am determined to find even more interesting ways to teach with immersion and
TPR/TPRS. Students responded and actually used the language with more confidence than I had
seen all year.
Because of this new found information on immersion through my research, I plan to keep
implementing this so that it becomes a regular expectation in my classroom. Students will
probably be taken aback when they first enter and think that they are not able to keep up.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

38

However, with the different strategies that I have implemented this year alone, I believe that we
can have students at higher levels of comprehension, assessments, and speaking by the time they
move to Spanish Level Two.
Since I have implemented this level of immersion in my classroom, we have taken some
of the assessments that ACTFL offers. Previous to the immersion intervention, my students were
at the low to middle Novice Levels according to the definitions (See Appendix C). After just six
week of immersion, students were being assessed and reaching the middle to high Novice
Levels, and some had started in at the low end of Intermediate. If this is what six weeks of
immersion can do for students, I cannot imagine what an entire year will bring for the students
and their futures with learning the Spanish Language.
In conclusion, I will be keeping the immersion implementation in place for the following
year. The impact this had in a brief six-week time period was so strong that I believe it would
make an even bigger difference during a years time. If this has had such an impact on my
students learning this year, why would I not want the same type of language proficiency for my
future students? An immersion based classroom should show a growth in student learning and
proficiency in the target language they are there to learn. Immersion also expands the student
opportunities both in that classroom, the school and higher education they pursue, or even the
career they are going in to. I can see that my immersion implementation increased the
proficiency for my students in multiple ways and I want my students to flourish in their future
language learning.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

39

References
Alans, I., & Rodrguez, M. A. (2008). Sustaining a Dual Language Immersion Program:
Features of Success. Journal of Latinos and Education, 7(4), 305-319.
doi:10.1080/15348430802143378
Bearse, C., & de Jong, E. J. (2008). Cultural and Linguistic Investment: Adolescents in a
Secondary Two-Way Immersion Program. Equity & Excellence In Education, 41(3), 325340. doi:10.1080/10665680802174817
Bott Van Houten, J. (n.d.). ACTFL. Retrieved September 12, 2015, from http://www.actfl.org/
Christian, D., Howard, E. R., & Loeb, M. I. (2000). Bilingualism for All: Two-Way Immersion
Education in the United States. Theory Into Practice, 39(4), 258-66.
Collier, V., & Thomas, W. (2004, December 1). The Astounding Effectiveness of Dual
Language Education for All. Retrieved September 14, 2015.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

40

de Jong, E., & Howard, E. (2009). Integration in Two-Way Immersion Education: Equalising
Linguistic Benefits for All Students.International Journal Of Bilingual Education And
Bilingualism, 12(1), 81-99.
Rahmani Doqaruni, Vahid. (). A Quantitative Action Research on Promoting Confidence in a
Foreign Language Classroom: Implications for Second Language Teachers. i.e.: inquiry
in education:Vol. 5: Iss. 1, Article 3.
Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.nl.edu/ie/vol5/iss1/3
Gomez, L., Freeman, D., & Freeman, Y. (2005). Dual Language Education: A Promising 50-50
Model. Bilingual Research Journal,29(1), 145-164.

Jakubowski, A. (2013). Using visual aids in the secondary language classroom an action
research study on the use of illustrations during TPRS instruction (Doctoral dissertation,
The University of Toledo, 2013) (pp. 1-81). Toledo, ES: The University of Toledo Digital
Repository. Retrieved November 29, 2015.
Lindholm-Leary, K. J. (2005). The Rich Promise of Two-Way Immersion. Educational
Leadership, 62(4), 56-59.
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2012). Success and Challenges in Dual Language Education. Theory Into
Practice, 51(4), 256-262.
Lindholm-Leary, K. (2005, March 1). Review of Research and Best Practices on Effective
Features of Dual Language Education Programs. Retrieved September 16, 2015.
Lord, G. (2010). The Combined Effects of Immersion and Instruction on Second Language
Pronunciation. Foreign Language Annals, 43(3), 488-503. doi:10.1111/j.19449720.2010.01094.x

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

41

Ortega, V., & Pea, J. (2011). Repositorio Digital de la Universidad de Cuenca: TPR: Activities
to promote listening in an efl children classroom. Retrieved November 29, 2015, from
http://dspace.ucuenca.edu.ec/handle/123456789/2107
Phillips, J., & Abbott, M. (2011, October 1). A Decade of Foreign Language Standards: Impact,
Influence, and Future Directions. Retrieved September 12, 2015.
Uhl Chamot, A. (2004). Issues in Language Learning Strategy Research and Teaching.
Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 14-26. Retrieved November 29,
2015.

Appendix A
The teacher will keep record of their average scores of speaking, writing, and total percentage of
the time the intervention was occurring. The two semesters will be compared.

Student

Semester 1

Six Week Immersion

Implementation

Speaking

Writing

Total
Percentage

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J

Speaking

Writing

Total
Percentage

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
AA

Appendix B

42

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

43

Student reflections will be filled out by each individual student at the end of first semester and at
the end of the six week implementation of immersion. The reflections will be in English because
I will be qualitative coding the information and opinions given by the students. Please see
attached pages below for the self-evaluation being used.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

44

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

45

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

46

Appendix C
These are the definitions of assessment levels as per what the American Council on the Teaching
of Foreign Languages dictates.

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

47

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

48

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

49

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

50

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

51

Running Head: THE EFFECTS OF IMMERSION THROUGH TPR AND TPRS

52