If you like "differentiated instruction"

[Anonymous]

then enrol (or try to) in a school that does it.

If you're threatened by "tracking" then avoid schools that do it.

The End.

P.S. These are the same schools. Evidently your beef is about which word fits your child.

Apparently Yu Ying and Latin are great if you've got one of the highly successful students. If you have an unsuccessful student, it is evidence of the school's covert attempts to weed out low-performing children such as your own. THEY. SHOULD. BE. STOPPED.

Yawn.

[Anonymous]

I like differentiated instruction and enroll my child at a school that does this. I argue that it is not tracking-- because tracking implies that you are "Set" on one particular path and it will be increadibly difficult if not impossible for you to jump to another track. My child currently attends an advanced math class, but not the advanced reading class (this is 3rd grade). During the year, this could change. If she doesn't do the work, she could get kicked out of the advanced class and if she starts to excel in reading and writing she could be moved up. The fluidity provides constant challenge to those that are excelling in an area, and yet provides hope to those that are struggling that they need not stay in a particular track. This is the American way-- you can rise or fall depending on what you accomplish.

[Anonymous]

Why are peopled particularly in DC threatened so much by schools that push excellence? Neither YY nor WL is a neighborhood school and both have missions that are clearly articulated. Admission to either is a process. Not every kid is academically inclined or will prosper under these educational models. They should not be asked or stopped from pursuing a path that is apparently successful for many kids because some kids cannot tread the water. There are regular programs available for those kids and that is where they belong.

[Anonymous]

" There are regular programs available for those kids and that is where they belong."

Um, no. There are not an adequate supply of high quality "regular" programs in Washington DC that do not require writing a very large check.

YY is hardly excellent, but that's been covered elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Um, no. There are not an adequate supply of high quality "regular" programs in Washington DC that do not require writing a very large check.

Correct and furthermore, YY is not a magnet school. It is a public charter that says they take everyone who is let in through the lottery system. Therefore, they must adhere to their mission to give every student an equal opportunity to learn in a Chinese immersion setting like their charter states.

[Anonymous]

It doesn't if you are enrolled in any of the high performing schools it's de facto tracking. We are all doing it, no way to avoid it. And if we are being honest, lots of these schools are just frittering at the edges with differentiation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Um, no. There are not an adequate supply of high quality "regular" programs in Washington DC that do not require writing a very large check.

Correct and furthermore, YY is not a magnet school. It is a public charter that says they take everyone who is let in through the lottery system. Therefore, they must adhere to their mission to give every student an equal opportunity to learn in a Chinese immersion setting like their charter states.

Part of their mission states that children will be literate in English. Should children who can't read by 2nd or 3rd grade spend half their week learning Chinese characters?

[Anonymous]

Chinese is not easy to learn, and it is not the best fit for everyone. We are new YY parents. If it becomes apparent to me and the school that my child is not thriving in this environment, we will leave. I am being completely honest when I say I would not enroll my child in that class. Attending the school may be my desire, but not my child's desire.

[Anonymous]

ITA. Chinese is a very difficult language so I can't understand all this talk about lawsuits and people insisting that Yu Ying keep every student in an immersion program when they can't even read at 3rd grade level in 3rd grade in English.

Language skills are like Math skills and no sane person would insist that everyone be taught Calculus when they can't even master Algebra. Some people are not good at Math and some are not very good at learning another language especially when it's a language like Chinese.

These parents who insist that their child be kept in immersion and that Yu Ying should simply "teach better" are delusional especially when it sounds like Yu Ying tried extra tutoring to bring the kids up to grade level in English within the immersion program and failed. Obviously, learning Chinese is not for students who flounder in English.

[Anonymous]

Not delusional in the least. The immersion model doesn't presuppose one language over the other. That's the whole idea. It is developmentally appropriate that the students have some difficulty learning both languages, but if the teachers are teaching the same concepts in both languages, the children will have less difficulty. You simply cannot say they are "failing" at the young age of 8 years old. That is what is DELUSIONAL!!

[Anonymous]

"Therefore, they must adhere to their mission to give every student an equal opportunity to learn in a Chinese immersion setting like their charter states."

Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcomes. While charters, until the law is changed, cannot be academically selective, they need to be upfront about their program and expectations for all students. Some parents may decide the program is not for their kids, after all, and choose another option. Mandarin Chinese is a hard language.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not delusional in the least. The immersion model doesn't presuppose one language over the other. That's the whole idea. It is developmentally appropriate that the students have some difficulty learning both languages, but if the teachers are teaching the same concepts in both languages, the children will have less difficulty. You simply cannot say they are "failing" at the young age of 8 years old. That is what is DELUSIONAL!!

The immersion model may not presuppose but we live where English is spoken and written. These kids have an advantage in their native language. If their language skills are so weak (as being not reading at 3rd grade level) in English, frankly, I doubt they are learning much in Chinese either. And if you think keeping them in an immersion program will somehow make up for their lack of ability in English (or Chinese), yes, you are delusional.

[Anonymous]

Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcomes.

You are correct. But it is not equal opportunity if a less than track is created.

[Anonymous]

And if you think keeping them in an immersion program will somehow make up for their lack of ability in English (or Chinese), yes, you are delusional.

It would be nice if you would at least read up a little about the intent and outcomes of immersion before you call me delusional. You simply don't seem to understand the idea and intent of language immersion. All early immersion students lag behind monolingual peers in literacy (reading, spelling, and punctuation) for the first few years. However, after 3 or 4 years in the program, the immersion students eventually catch up with monolingual students. Stopping students at 2nd grade and deciding that immersion isn't going to work, doesn't go along with the research and sets up the tracked children for failure. It really is unfortunate that the school doesn't give its own mission a chance!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And if you think keeping them in an immersion program will somehow make up for their lack of ability in English (or Chinese), yes, you are delusional.

It would be nice if you would at least read up a little about the intent and outcomes of immersion before you call me delusional. You simply don't seem to understand the idea and intent of language immersion. All early immersion students lag behind monolingual peers in literacy (reading, spelling, and punctuation) for the first few years. However, after 3 or 4 years in the program, the immersion students eventually catch up with monolingual students. Stopping students at 2nd grade and deciding that immersion isn't going to work, doesn't go along with the research and sets up the tracked children for failure. It really is unfortunate that the school doesn't give its own mission a chance!!

Right... The non-immersion track has how many, 12? out of the 35. Obviously, not all early immersion students lag behind.