What happens to immersion programs with new regional programs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe my math is flawed but since OWI is 9 years (K-8), doesn’t that translate to ~2700 spots each year?

That seems like the same math. We have immersion kids and I don’t know many (if any) of their classmates who would go to private. But even if a quarter of them did (if they eliminate the program), that’s still less than 1% each grades students. I don’t think MCPS would notice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

I'm curious how the OSA matched students in this report. Not so much that I doubt the outcomes they are reporting - they seem believable given what the report describes about TWI implementation. However, the TWI schools vary a lot amongst each other on outcomes, and elementary schools in MCPS, even those with similar demographics, do vary on reading and math outcomes within demographic groups. While I definitely think they should work on improving the programs I don't think this evaluation shows what it claims to show.abiut student outcomes. At a minimum I think it would make more sense to see the results at a school level instead of combining all the TWI schools (which vary greatly in terms of their leadership an demographics)

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2025/250513_Two%20Way%20Immersion%202024_Final.pdf

Two ongoing problems are, on the one hand, that MCPS clearly conducts such research with an end already in mind, restricting the investigation to that which would tend to support particular conclusions, and, on the other hand, results are presented not only with those ends in mind, but in muddled ways which, even when not intended, might easily be misinterpreted as slanted, because they do not make sure to disclaim with detail such misinterpretation.

What?

Slow down. Read. Re-read if you need to. If it still doesn't register, ask a more pointed question instead of throwing shade wirh a trite retort.

Are you saying their evaluations are biased and poorly written?

What do you think?

I think it's absurd how many words you used to say that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS understands just how successful and sought after the OWI programs are. OWI keeps a lot of families in the system that would go private without it. OWI has stood the test of time and is a huge accomplishment and source of pride for MCPS. It would be amazing to offer it in every region and I would love to support that effort. Much better and more likely option than ending a super successful and beloved program of 50 years!

I wonder how possible it would be to offer in every region. It probably could happen most easily if they offered one language per region, but that seems like it could cause controversy. I am very in favor of the programs (especially Spanish) being spread out a little more equally across the county.

I wouldn’t say the program keeps too many families at MCPS. There are less than 300 spots offered each year and many families can’t afford private school.

I agree that these programs (generally) are a huge success and a highlight of MCPS. I wish they could offer more spots .

Are there a lot of credentialed language teachers available?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

I'm curious how the OSA matched students in this report. Not so much that I doubt the outcomes they are reporting - they seem believable given what the report describes about TWI implementation. However, the TWI schools vary a lot amongst each other on outcomes, and elementary schools in MCPS, even those with similar demographics, do vary on reading and math outcomes within demographic groups. While I definitely think they should work on improving the programs I don't think this evaluation shows what it claims to show.abiut student outcomes. At a minimum I think it would make more sense to see the results at a school level instead of combining all the TWI schools (which vary greatly in terms of their leadership an demographics)

https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2025/250513_Two%20Way%20Immersion%202024_Final.pdf

Two ongoing problems are, on the one hand, that MCPS clearly conducts such research with an end already in mind, restricting the investigation to that which would tend to support particular conclusions, and, on the other hand, results are presented not only with those ends in mind, but in muddled ways which, even when not intended, might easily be misinterpreted as slanted, because they do not make sure to disclaim with detail such misinterpretation.

What?

Slow down. Read. Re-read if you need to. If it still doesn't register, ask a more pointed question instead of throwing shade wirh a trite retort.

Are you saying their evaluations are biased and poorly written?

What do you think?

I think it's absurd how many words you used to say that

Great. So you understood at least the main thrust, where the many words were written to try to provide context...but you decided just to write, "What?" instead of leaving it alone for others to read without the bias of the shade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS understands just how successful and sought after the OWI programs are. OWI keeps a lot of families in the system that would go private without it. OWI has stood the test of time and is a huge accomplishment and source of pride for MCPS. It would be amazing to offer it in every region and I would love to support that effort. Much better and more likely option than ending a super successful and beloved program of 50 years!

I wonder how possible it would be to offer in every region. It probably could happen most easily if they offered one language per region, but that seems like it could cause controversy. I am very in favor of the programs (especially Spanish) being spread out a little more equally across the county.

I wouldn’t say the program keeps too many families at MCPS. There are less than 300 spots offered each year and many families can’t afford private school.

I agree that these programs (generally) are a huge success and a highlight of MCPS. I wish they could offer more spots .

Are there a lot of credentialed language teachers available?

DP Aren't we looking for credentialed elementary school teachers who happen to be bilingual? If they are able to staff dual immersion and that model isn't working, I suspect they could reconfigure and expand Spanish lottery OWI programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS understands just how successful and sought after the OWI programs are. OWI keeps a lot of families in the system that would go private without it. OWI has stood the test of time and is a huge accomplishment and source of pride for MCPS. It would be amazing to offer it in every region and I would love to support that effort. Much better and more likely option than ending a super successful and beloved program of 50 years!

I wonder how possible it would be to offer in every region. It probably could happen most easily if they offered one language per region, but that seems like it could cause controversy. I am very in favor of the programs (especially Spanish) being spread out a little more equally across the county.

I wouldn’t say the program keeps too many families at MCPS. There are less than 300 spots offered each year and many families can’t afford private school.

I agree that these programs (generally) are a huge success and a highlight of MCPS. I wish they could offer more spots .

Are there a lot of credentialed language teachers available?

Maybe Spanish is something they could do. We are at French Immersion at Sligo Creek and based on how difficult it seems to be to find French subs, I can't imagine that they would have enough credentialed French teachers to expand the program further even though I would support this. A couple of the teachers went through the program themselves!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS understands just how successful and sought after the OWI programs are. OWI keeps a lot of families in the system that would go private without it. OWI has stood the test of time and is a huge accomplishment and source of pride for MCPS. It would be amazing to offer it in every region and I would love to support that effort. Much better and more likely option than ending a super successful and beloved program of 50 years!

I wonder how possible it would be to offer in every region. It probably could happen most easily if they offered one language per region, but that seems like it could cause controversy. I am very in favor of the programs (especially Spanish) being spread out a little more equally across the county.

I wouldn’t say the program keeps too many families at MCPS. There are less than 300 spots offered each year and many families can’t afford private school.

I agree that these programs (generally) are a huge success and a highlight of MCPS. I wish they could offer more spots .

Are there a lot of credentialed language teachers available?

Maybe Spanish is something they could do. We are at French Immersion at Sligo Creek and based on how difficult it seems to be to find French subs, I can't imagine that they would have enough credentialed French teachers to expand the program further even though I would support this. A couple of the teachers went through the program themselves!

I agree with this and I think expanding Spanish is extremely worthwhile and could help fill demand across the board. Many people apply to these programs because they want a language and ideally a language program close to their house, but aren't super committed to a specific language (but Spanish is obviously the most popular). I suspect that if they expanded Spanish seats they could meet demand and still have enough French and Chinese seats for people really set on that language. (I also think they could try running the lottery with a ranking system so people got their first still available choice, or something like that!)

[Anonymous]

I wonder if they could make it work through the elementary boundary study to have a two-way Spanish immersion school in every region, with space for a class of out-of-bounds kids in every grade who could lottery in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they could make it work through the elementary boundary study to have a two-way Spanish immersion school in every region, with space for a class of out-of-bounds kids in every grade who could lottery in?

I think that would be great. I also think they could look at other districts to make these programs voluntary for resident students without requiring them to COSA to a different school if they don't want dual language immersion. As it is it is not uncommon for kids with IEPs to have to COSA because the dual language doesn't work out for them and it is unfortunate they have to do that even though they could do fine in a general ed classroom just not immersion. Of course it would also help if they had special ed support in the target language for dual language immersion students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they could make it work through the elementary boundary study to have a two-way Spanish immersion school in every region, with space for a class of out-of-bounds kids in every grade who could lottery in?

Interesting idea, but isn't part of the issue that the initial data on the TWI model (as implemented by MCPS) isn't great?

[Anonymous]

I love the idea of being able to rate your choices for which immersion program you would prefer. This could in some cases help siblings stay together in the same school and possibly help families stay closer to home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they could make it work through the elementary boundary study to have a two-way Spanish immersion school in every region, with space for a class of out-of-bounds kids in every grade who could lottery in?

Interesting idea, but isn't part of the issue that the initial data on the TWI model (as implemented by MCPS) isn't great?

They should absolutely fix the implementation issues identified in the report but the data is kind of ridiculous and not a reason to abandon the model. They should also speak with the families involved to better understand the issues

[Anonymous]

Also where is the BS matched data on OWI programs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if they could make it work through the elementary boundary study to have a two-way Spanish immersion school in every region, with space for a class of out-of-bounds kids in every grade who could lottery in?

Interesting idea, but isn't part of the issue that the initial data on the TWI model (as implemented by MCPS) isn't great?

They should absolutely fix the implementation issues identified in the report but the data is kind of ridiculous and not a reason to abandon the model. They should also speak with the families involved to better understand the issues

Yeah, I'm not advocating they abandon the model, but I'm not sure the data currently makes the case for expanding the model.

[Anonymous]

None of this matters unless you’re in a Chinese immersion. MCPS confirmed Chinese would be the only WL option in the new Regional Program Services model.