Examining Bilingual Education Research through Meta-Analysis and Narrative Review: A Response to Baker

In this response to Baker's (1987) "Comment on Willig's 'A Meta-Analysis of Selected Studies on the Effectiveness of Bilingual Education,' " I address major questions raised by Baker and present counter arguments to each. First, I contend that the questions addressed in the meta-analysis were more appropriate for answering the concerns of the White House review team than were those addressed in Baker and de Kanter (1981); second, I provide evidence suggesting that one of Baker's major points--that Willig (1985) did not include the studies from Baker and de Kanter (1983)--is primarily a rhetorical strategy; third, I explain the process of information gathering in the meta-analysis and compare my information from specific studies to that reported in Baker and de Kanter (1981), demonstrating pitfalls in Baker's review methods; fourth, I present my rationale for the exclusion of specific studies not included in the meta-analysis and demonstrate that Baker's treatment of these studies is flawed; finally, I clarify several technical questions raised by Baker.