(2026) Supporting French Immersion Students with Reading Difficulties and Reading Disabilities
Is the French immersion program suitable for students with reading difficulties, or should struggling readers be encouraged to switch to the regular English program?
- What widespread beliefs persist regarding the suitability of French immersion (FI) for students with reading difficulties and reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia)?
- Does the available research evidence support these beliefs about the suitability of FI for students with reading difficulties and those with reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia)?
- What have we learned about early identification and early intervention for struggling readers in the FI setting?
- Where do we go from here?
- Implications for classroom practice
- Conclusion
- References
- Link to the original publication or the bibliographical reference
What widespread beliefs persist regarding the suitability of French immersion (FI) for students with reading difficulties and reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia)?
Due to its popularity, the FI student population has become increasingly diverse (Bourgoin, 2014; Garrett & Mady, 2024). Today’s FI classrooms often include students with varied learning needs, including children who struggle to learn to read. Despite considerable research evidence that has established the suitability of FI for struggling readers (Genesee, 2007; Genesee & Erdos, 2019; Grosjean, 2019; Wise, D’Angelo, & Chen, 2016; Wise & Chen, 2015), some people believe that dual-language educational programs like FI are not suitable for students who have difficulties with reading acquisition or those with diagnosed reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia). It is generally thought that learning two languages simultaneously will exacerbate their learning challenges (Genesee, 2015).
Many students who struggle with reading acquisition face barriers restricting their access to FI, arguably the most effective educational means for attaining functional bilingualism in Canada’s two official languages (Genesee & Jared, 2008). During the Ontario Human Rights Commission’s inquiry into human rights issues facing students with reading disabilities in Ontario’s public education system (2022), families consistently reported that their FI children “were discouraged from choosing or continuing FI” (p. 100) as a result of their reading difficulties. Parents and caregivers were told that children who struggle to learn to read “should not be learning English and French at the same time” (p. 236), an unsubstantiated belief that has limited access to the program for many students. Additionally, the inquiry heard from families that some schools refused “to provide accommodations for students with reading difficulties in FI programs” (p. 336).
Reading difficulties are one of the most important factors influencing families to withdraw their children from FI (Mannavarayan, 2001), and the switch to the regular English program is typically made before the end of Grade 3 (Halsall, 1998). This is partially due to the fact that at-risk readers in FI are rarely identified in the early stages of their literacy development (Wise & Chen, 2010). This delay in early identification is based on the belief that a threshold of oral proficiency in French, the target language, must be acquired prior to the assessment of reading risk or the introduction of reading instruction (MacCoubrey et al., 2004; Wise, D’Angelo, & Chen, 2016). Consequently, FI students at risk for later reading difficulties tend to miss out on targeted early intervention opportunities (Wise & Chen, 2009). During the Ontario Human Rights Inquiry, families reported that lack of access to timely reading interventions resulted in them having to switch their children to the English program, which “changed their academic pathways and uprooted them from their friend network” (2022, p. 101).
Does the available research evidence support these beliefs about the suitability of FI for students with reading difficulties and those with reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia)?
To begin, a clear distinction must be made between reading difficulties and reading disabilities (e.g., dyslexia), typically diagnosed by registered psychologists (Grosjean, 2019). A FI student who is struggling with reading acquisition in French but has no similar word-reading problem in their first language does not, in all likelihood, have reading disabilities. In this case, the reading struggles the student is experiencing could be attributed to difficulties acquiring French as an additional language or a related issue (e.g., the provision of ineffective instruction). A FI student who has been diagnosed with dyslexia will have reading-related difficulties in both French and English. This is due to the fact that the underlying impairment is part of the student’s genetic profile, and this will impact their ability to learn to read in any language (Grosjean, 2019).
Research has consistently supported the inclusion of students with diverse learning needs in FI programs, including those at risk for reading disabilities (Bourgoin, 2014). Following an extensive review of the research evidence on FI students who struggle to learn to read, Genesee (2007) concluded that FI students with reading difficulties are not “at differentially greater risk in immersion” (p. 677). No studies to date have indicated that students with identified reading disabilities or even difficulty learning to read cannot benefit from participation in dual-language programs such as FI (Grosjean, 2019).
In his review of reading research, Genesee (2007) included FI students with weak reading skills and those who were at risk for persistent reading difficulties. The review did not include any studies involving FI students with diagnosed reading disabilities like dyslexia, as research evidence is “scant at best and methodologically weak” (Genesee, 2007, p. 676). However, Genesee and Erdos (2019) argue that based upon findings from reading research, “dyslexia should not prevent children from learning to read and write in both languages” (p. 2). Investigations conducted by Siegel (2016, 2020) have demonstrated that for dyslexics, bilingualism “may be an advantage” (Siegel, 2016, p. 145). With a focus on oral language development, phonological awareness, and evidence-based interventions in both French and English, “a child with dyslexia can be very successful in FI” (L. Siegel, personal communication, April 17, 2025).1
What have we learned about early identification and early intervention for struggling readers in the FI setting?
Research evidence has clearly established the importance of early identification and evidence-based reading interventions for students with reading difficulties (Bournot-Trites, 2008; Early Reading Expert Panel, 2003; Geva, 2006; National Reading Panel, 2000; Wise & Chen, 2015). Without an early screening procedure in place to identify reading risk immediately upon entry into the FI context, children who struggle to acquire French reading skills may not be identified as at-risk readers until grades 2 or 3 (Keep, 1993; MacCoubrey et al., 2004). Interestingly, investigations have shown that English tests can be used for early screening purposes in the FI setting to identify at-risk readers at the very beginning of their educational careers (Erdos et al., 2014; MacCoubrey et al., 2004). Early screening in English, the majority language, would ensure that there is no delay in identifying reading risk (Endler, 2008) while FI classroom teachers are focusing on developing students’ French oral language skills (e.g., listening and speaking).
Evidence-based reading interventions for struggling readers in FI have been shown to be highly effective (Wise, D’Angelo, & Chen, 2016; Wise & Chen, 2015; Wise & Chen, 2010). At issue is the language that should be used when implementing reading interventions in the FI setting. The decision to intervene in French as opposed to English should be based on whatever language is the primary language of instruction in the classroom, or in both languages if the instruction is divided equally between English and French (Grosjean, 2019). Some research has indicated that the provision of reading interventions in both languages may be preferable (Genesee & Erdos, 2019).
Once students are identified during screening procedures as being at risk for future reading difficulties, reading interventions should be initiated at the earliest possible opportunity (Wise & Chen, 2010). This is recommended whether a child is having difficulty with reading acquisition or has a diagnosis of reading disabilities like dyslexia (Grosjean, 2019). Genesee and Erdos (2019) recommend that reading interventions for struggling readers in FI programs should be tailored to their strengths and needs, and the intensity and duration of that support should depend on their level of need. The researchers argue that interventions students receive should focus, at least initially, on how French and English “are the same or similar” (p. 4), rather than how the two languages differ. They highlight the critical importance of progress monitoring to ensure that students are, in fact, learning what has been systematically and explicitly taught (Genesee & Erdos, 2019).
Where do we go from here?
Further research is needed that focuses on the suitability of FI for students with reading difficulties and reading disabilities (Genesee, 2007). This must include studies with rigorous methodologies, including random assignment of students to treatment and control conditions. Moreover, additional professional development opportunities for FI teachers are necessary to support implementation of research-aligned identification, assessment, and intervention procedures (Bourgoin, 2014). These will help FI teachers gain confidence in their abilities to meet the learning needs of struggling readers in their classrooms (Mady & Muhling, 2017). Additionally, teacher education programs must better equip FI teachers to identify, instruct, and support students with reading-related difficulties (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2022).
Implications for classroom practice
We must recognize the critical importance of building oral language proficiency in French as a foundation for the development of French literacy skills; however, it is not necessary to wait for students to acquire French oral language proficiency before assessing reading risk and initiating literacy instruction. Students who are at risk for later reading difficulties need to be identified at the earliest possible opportunity in FI classrooms. Early screening can be done in English with all students entering FI Kindergarten. Once students have acquired some basic French language skills, it would be highly informative to do follow-up screening in French and compare the English and French results.
In order to identify at-risk readers, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (2022) recommends that all students in Kindergarten Year 1 (formerly known as Junior Kindergarten) to Grade 2 be screened twice per year using standardized screening tools. At-risk readers identified using valid and reliable measures should have access to evidence-based reading interventions (Ontario Human Rights Commission, 2022). Studies investigating interventions for struggling readers have shown that they benefit from structured literacy, an evidence-based approach to instruction (International Dyslexia Association, 2020).2 This approach is beneficial for students with reading difficulties in both FI and the regular English program. Frequent progress monitoring should be done to give FI teachers feedback on the effectiveness of the reading instruction they are providing so that adjustments can be made, if needed.
Conclusion
At issue is providing equitable access to FI programs for all learners, including those with reading-related difficulties. In order to move toward greater inclusion in the FI setting, we must dispel prevalent but unsubstantiated beliefs. This requires the dissemination of the research evidence and reflection on the part of teachers and school administrators on how their beliefs contribute to exclusionary practices in the FI setting. According to Genesee (2007), “while it is still possible that [French] immersion is not suitable for some students, the evidence currently available does not allow us to identify beforehand which students these are” (p. 676). The available research evidence has suggested that the widespread skepticism about providing struggling readers with a dual-language education is largely unfounded, and that there is no reason to exclude them from additional language-learning opportunities. To set them up for success in FI, it is essential to implement early screening, targeted reading interventions, and progress monitoring, along with access to accommodations. With appropriate support, these students can overcome their difficulties and become proficient readers in French and English.
References
Bourgoin, R. C. (2014). Inclusionary practices in French immersion: A need to link research to practice. Canadian Journal for New Scholars in Education/Revue canadienne des jeunes chercheures en education, 5(1), 1–11. https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cjnse/article/view/30545
Bournot-Trites, M. (2008). Fostering reading acquisition in French immersion. Encyclopedia of Language and Literacy Development. London, Ontario: Canadian Language and Literacy Research Network (pp. 1-8).
Early Reading Expert Panel. (2003). Early reading strategy: The report of the expert panel on early reading in Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Ministry of Education.
Endler, M. (2008). Predictors of early reading in a second language: The transfer of phonological processing skills and the implications for French immersion. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto, Ontario.
Erdos, C., Genesee, F., Savage, R., & Haigh, C. (2014). Predicting Risk for Oral and Written Language Learning Difficulties in Students’ Education in a Second Language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35, 371-398.
Garrett, M. & Mady, C. (2024). Teaching in a French immersion setting: A review of the who, the what and the how. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 14, 64–84. http://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2024.141004
Genesee, F. (2007). French immersion and at-risk students: A review of research evidence. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 655–688.
Genesee, F. (2015). Myths about early childhood bilingualism. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 56(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038599
Genesee, F., & Erdos, C. (2019, November 25). Frequently asked questions about the suitability of immersion for all students. Centre for Research on Brain, Language and Music (pp. 1- 6).
Genesee, F., & Jared, D. (2008). Literacy development in early French immersion programs. Canadian Psychology, 49, 140-147.
Geva, E. (2006). Learning to read in a second language: Research, implications, and recommendations for services. In R. E. Tremblay, R. G. Barr, & R. DeV. Peters (Eds.), Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development (pp. 1-12). Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development.
Grosjean, F. (2019, March 01). Dyslexia, bilingualism, and learning a second language. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/life- bilingual/201903/dyslexia-bilingualism-and-learning-second-languagehttps://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/life- bilingual/201903/dyslexia-bilingualism-and-learning-second-language
Halsall, N. (1998). French immersion: The success story told by research. Edmonton, AB: Alberta School Boards Association for Bilingual Education.
International Dyslexia Association. (2020). Structured literacy: Effective instruction for students with dyslexia and related reading difficulties. Retrieved from https://app.box.com/s/noj70cwd28vnvevb85xy1mm2yr29h7g9.
Keep, L. (1993). French immersion attrition: Implications for model building (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB.
MacCoubrey, S. J., Wade-Woolley, L., Klinger, D., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Early identification of at-risk L2 readers. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 61, 11–28.
Mady, C., & Muhling, S. (2017). Instructional Supports for Students with Special Education Needs in French as a Second Language Education: A Review of Canadian Empirical Literature. Journal of Education and Learning, 6, 14-22.
Mannavarayan, J. (2001). Revisiting why some students struggle in immersion: An expanded review of the literature (Unpublished master’s thesis). Simon Fraser University, British Columbia, Canada.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Ontario Human Rights Commission. (2022). Right to read: Public inquiry into human rights issues affecting students with reading disabilities. Retrieved from www.ohrc.on.ca.
Siegel, L.S. (2016). Bilingualism and dyslexia: The case of children learning English as an additional language. In Peer, L., & Reid, G. (Eds.), Multilingualism, Literacy and Dyslexia: Breaking down barriers for educators (2nd ed.) (pp. 137-147). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315708478
Siegel, L.S. (2020). Early identification and intervention to prevent reading failure: A response to intervention (RTI) initiative. The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 37(2), 140-146).
Wise, N., & Chen, X. (2009). Early identification and intervention for at-risk readers in French immersion. What works: Research into practice. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Ministry of Education. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zhv-oLAWJqKg07XVTYi4RrwDhCavN_0u/viewhttps://www.onted.ca/monographs/what-works/early- identification-and-intervention-for-at-risk-readers-in-french-immersi
Wise, N., & Chen, X. (2010). At-Risk Readers in French Immersion: Early Identification and Early Intervention. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 128–149. Retrieved from https://journals.lib.unb.ca/index.php/CJAL/article/view/19887.
Wise, N., & Chen, X. (2015). Early Intervention for Struggling Readers in Grade One French Immersion. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La revue canadienne des langues vivantes, 71(3), 288-306. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/588102.
Wise, N., D’Angelo, N., & Chen, X. (2016). A school-based phonological awareness intervention for struggling readers in early French immersion. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9585-9
