What happens to immersion programs with new regional programs?

[Anonymous]

I hope they get rid of the programs. It had little benefit and the data suggest kids in these programs fall behind academically in reading due to trying to absorb another language which often cannot be reinforced at home.

MCPS needs to focus on the basics- reading writing, arithmetic, special education and gifted learners. Everything is not needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope they get rid of the programs. It had little benefit and the data suggest kids in these programs fall behind academically in reading due to trying to absorb another language which often cannot be reinforced at home.

MCPS needs to focus on the basics- reading writing, arithmetic, special education and gifted learners. Everything is not needed.

The data don't show that. EML, kids that receive FARMS and kids with disabilities do horribly in MCPS regardless of whether there is a TWI program . TWI should at least help the EMLs but they are still figuring out how to implement it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

If you make TWI programs lottery based then you'd consider them "valuable" as well

Demand is an open question. Even across the lottery based OWI programs, demand is even distributed.

Where is the data on demand?

This is not published, but different numbers apply to different programs and at some programs the WL moves quite quickkly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

I'm not deeply familiar with the data but they have assessed these programs in the past. Notably in 2016-2017ish when they decided to weaken the sibling link.

Feel free to link to the data on outcomes broken down by demographic group

Quickly googled and found this, looks like it's from 2011. I am not particularly interested in going through this myself but feel free
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/info/choice/updated-languageimmersionprograms.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

I'm not deeply familiar with the data but they have assessed these programs in the past. Notably in 2016-2017ish when they decided to weaken the sibling link.

Feel free to link to the data on outcomes broken down by demographic group

Quickly googled and found this, looks like it's from 2011. I am not particularly interested in going through this myself but feel free
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/info/choice/updated-languageimmersionprograms.pdf

Thanks for sharing this! Looks like a really different methodology than the one used for the TWI programs and neither seems particularly convincing to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

If you make TWI programs lottery based then you'd consider them "valuable" as well

Demand is an open question. Even across the lottery based OWI programs, demand is even distributed.

Where is the data on demand?

This is not published, but different numbers apply to different programs and at some programs the WL moves quite quickkly.

Funny how the TWI evaluation didn't break down the data by school even though the TWI schools all have really different test scores per the MD school report card.

[Anonymous]

The TWI programs are a waste of money. If they are going to be implemented immersion, I'd rather it be in middle and high school levels with a summer study abroad program.

No need to have it in elementary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

They're the only way to get a free ticket out of a local elementary school that parents find undesirable. They are always going to be seen as valuable and have high demand for that reason alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

They're the only way to get a free ticket out of a local elementary school that parents find undesirable. They are always going to be seen as valuable and have high demand for that reason alone.

No doubt, until MCPS makes real equity a priority. But the programs, themselves, are seen as highly desirable. Perhaps not every family is interested, but interested families and matriculating students come from all over, even if those from closer areas or less well regarded schools are more likely to accept an invitation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

I'm not deeply familiar with the data but they have assessed these programs in the past. Notably in 2016-2017ish when they decided to weaken the sibling link.

That decision was more a political one than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is the OWI data that makes the case for expanding the OWI model?

Good question. AFAIK, MCPS does not make that data available. At the same time, the long, long waitlists provide some inkling that they are valuable.

If you make TWI programs lottery based then you'd consider them "valuable" as well

In the sense that it would be a choice instead of being forced on people? Yes. But TWI has potential for learning just as OWI does. Proper implementation and the resources needed to do that are an issue, though the resource problem applies to OWI, too, even if the challenges are a bit different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

That's for high school.

Middle school immersion and all middle school magnet programs are TBD until they figure out whether middle schools are going to have to drop down to only one elective period a year to meet the state requirement for 60 minutes a day of math-- they will reassess after that but I suspect will just cut all the immersion and magnet programs if the state mandate stands. (Or maybe magnets will stay if they can find enough kids willing to skip all foreign language, music, arts, or other electives in order to be in a magnet and use their only elective spot for a magnet elective. That would probably solve the problem of there being way more interested kids than spaces available...)

With the state plan for MS requiring 300 minutes/week I'm not sure that there is time for even 6 equally timed periods. In that case, elective (or magnet-class) scheduling may be reduced to half periods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The TWI programs are a waste of money. If they are going to be implemented immersion, I'd rather it be in middle and high school levels with a summer study abroad program.

No need to have it in elementary schools.

Elementary school is absolutely the best time to learn languages. That's when children's brains are wired for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I hope they get rid of the programs. It had little benefit and the data suggest kids in these programs fall behind academically in reading due to trying to absorb another language which often cannot be reinforced at home.

MCPS needs to focus on the basics- reading writing, arithmetic, special education and gifted learners. Everything is not needed.

Why do you think there are no benefits to being bilingual?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The TWI programs are a waste of money. If they are going to be implemented immersion, I'd rather it be in middle and high school levels with a summer study abroad program.

No need to have it in elementary schools.

Elementary school is absolutely the best time to learn languages. That's when children's brains are wired for it.

Yes, it would be such a step backward to eliminate elementary foreign language options in the county.