Nearly 40 percent of California's K-12 students are multilingual learners, speaking more than 100 home languages, and similar shifts are visible across the country. Research cited in a recent regional report found that students in dual-language immersion programs outperform English-only peers in reading by the equivalent of seven to nine months and reach English proficiency at higher rates by sixth grade. The same report noted that only about one in ten English learners reaches grade-level standards in math and English language arts. Programs that build literacy in two languages show promise, and they need ways to measure it.

Writing is where assessment of biliteracy becomes most complicated. A student may express complex ideas in Spanish and still develop English academic vocabulary, or write fluently in English while their home language remains less formal. A single English rubric misses half the story, and a grade based on English alone can understate what a student can do. Teachers need a framework that assesses writing in each language on its own terms.

A biliteracy rubric does not need to be elaborate. It needs clear criteria that apply across languages, such as ideas, organization, and evidence, along with language-specific criteria for vocabulary, grammar, and conventions. Teachers can then see where a student's thinking is strong and where language development is needed, in each language, which is far more useful for planning instruction than a single overall score that blends ideas and language together.

Use shared criteria for thinking and separate criteria for language

Write the first set of criteria in language-neutral terms: a clear claim, relevant support, logical organization, and awareness of audience. These can be scored on the same scale for writing in either language, which highlights transfer of skills. Add language-specific criteria for each language, such as precision of vocabulary and control of sentence structure. Having both sets lets teachers distinguish a thinking problem from a language problem.

• Use language-neutral criteria for claim, support, organization, and audience in both languages
• Add separate language-specific criteria for vocabulary and sentence control
• Collect paired writing samples in each language across the year
• Have qualified readers review work in each language
• Report growth to families by criterion and by language

Compare across languages to see transfer

Collect paired writing samples on similar tasks in each language at several points in the year. Look for evidence that skills learned in one language show up in the other, such as using a topic sentence or integrating evidence. Share these observations with students, who often are not aware of how much they can transfer. Seeing transfer builds confidence and metalinguistic awareness.

Be careful not to treat one language as the standard against which the other is judged. Students writing in a home language deserve the same quality of attention and feedback as those writing in English. Teachers who are not fluent in a student's language should collaborate with colleagues who are. Fair assessment depends on qualified readers, and a rough grasp of a student's home language is not enough to judge nuance in word choice, register, or tone.

Give feedback that respects both languages

Offer feedback in the language of the writing whenever possible, or provide bilingual comments. Focus on one or two priorities per piece, and acknowledge strengths in content. Encourage students to use their full linguistic repertoire when planning, such as brainstorming in one language and drafting in another. This approach treats bilingualism as an asset, and it shows students that every language they know is a legitimate tool for building an idea before it reaches the page.

Where a rubric-based tool is available, check carefully whether it works reliably in each language before using it with student writing. Many tools perform better in English than in other languages, and errors in a home language could mislead students. A teacher who reads the language should review any draft output. If the tool is not reliable in a language, do not use it for that language.

Report progress in ways families understand

Families in dual-language programs often care deeply about growth in both languages. Share a simple chart showing scores by criterion in each language over time, along with a short comment in a language the family understands. Highlight growth in thinking and in language separately. Parents appreciate seeing that bilingualism is valued, especially when the report explains what each score means and what a family can do at home to support writing in either language.

Use the data to refine the program. If students consistently show strong ideas in the home language but weaker development in English academic language, the program can adjust instruction. If transfer is lower than expected, build explicit comparison activities. Assessment that reflects the program's goals supports continuous improvement, because teachers can point to specific criteria and specific grade levels where adjustments are needed instead of relying on impressions.