World Language FCPS vs LCPS

[Anonymous]

Students in FCPS who go through the immersion programs in fcps, usually end up in WL 3 (Span 3/French 3) their first year of high school. They are rare cases, as very few fcps attend immersion programs all the wat through 6th gr). On the other hand, many non-immersion students in LCPS take WL 1 and WL 2 in middle school and move onto WL3 in high school. My questions are:
-Are the fcps and lcps curriculums similar (I don’t see how)
-Why don’t more fcps kids move onto WL3 as freshmen? Are they allowed to take WL1-2 in middle school?
-If curriculums are not similar, do colleges understand the differences? Do all WL3 carry the same weight?

[Anonymous]

I can't answer the LCPS piece, but non-immersion students in FCPS are increasingly offered Spanish/French 1A (half of the first year course) in 7th and then 1B (second half of the first year course) in 8th. The idea being that it gives students a solid foundation to build on in high school language. Immersion students can move onto the immersion feeder MS and take their language with the immersion students from ES (https://www.fcps.edu/academics/middle-school-academics-7-8/world-languages/middle-school-immersion-transition-program). Really the program produces some pretty sub-par results in terms of language proficiency. My kid probably benefited from the type of critical thinking required to learn a new language, but their actual speaking/writing skills in the immersion language (Spanish, in our case) was not exactly head and shoulders above my other kid who didn't do ES immersion. But I know I'm about to get attacked by the super pro-immersion parents on this board.

[Anonymous]

So in middle school they do language 1 and 2? That seems odd—you’d think after 6 or 7 years of immersion you’d start in level 3 at least in 7th grade. Does the immersion program just teach vocabulary vs grammar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So in middle school they do language 1 and 2? That seems odd—you’d think after 6 or 7 years of immersion you’d start in level 3 at least in 7th grade. Does the immersion program just teach vocabulary vs grammar?

Yep. But the rah-rah immersion crowd will tell you that it's not about the actual language acquisition, it's about the thinking required to acquire the language. Then they will link to studies about the benefits of being bilingual, but native English speakers who do FCPS immersion programs are generally not really bilingual when they leave the program. Ex: https://dana.org/article/the-cognitive-benefits-of-being-bilingual/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in middle school they do language 1 and 2? That seems odd—you’d think after 6 or 7 years of immersion you’d start in level 3 at least in 7th grade. Does the immersion program just teach vocabulary vs grammar?

Yep. But the rah-rah immersion crowd will tell you that it's not about the actual language acquisition, it's about the thinking required to acquire the language. Then they will link to studies about the benefits of being bilingual, but native English speakers who do FCPS immersion programs are generally not really bilingual when they leave the program. Ex: https://dana.org/article/the-cognitive-benefits-of-being-bilingual/

That’s a bummer. If it truly produced fluent (even if only in speaking!) kids, it would be an awesome program. Without that, I would rather keep my kid doing math in English, since that’s going to have a bigger difference in middle school.

[Anonymous]

Doesn’t fcps immersion only focus on math and sciences? If they don’t have a language arts component, then what is the point? If you want your kid to have “3 years of WL” for college applications, then just move to Loudoun County and they can be done with WL by freshman year, if they apply themselves just a little. No need for immersion program.

[Anonymous]

In our experience, immersion produces very strong comprehension, so-so linguistic production. Kind of makes sense because kids spend a lot of their time listening to the teacher, to instruction etc. but talk a lot less in elementary school (and when they talk with their peers, even if it's in the immersion language--it only happens in the immersion classes and their peers are equally beginners). But the strong comprehension plus ease of learning forms a solid base. Some kids emerge fluent, but they are usually kids with at least one parent at home who knows the target language.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So in middle school they do language 1 and 2? That seems odd—you’d think after 6 or 7 years of immersion you’d start in level 3 at least in 7th grade. Does the immersion program just teach vocabulary vs grammar?

Yep. But the rah-rah immersion crowd will tell you that it's not about the actual language acquisition, it's about the thinking required to acquire the language. Then they will link to studies about the benefits of being bilingual, but native English speakers who do FCPS immersion programs are generally not really bilingual when they leave the program. Ex: https://dana.org/article/the-cognitive-benefits-of-being-bilingual/

+1 Finally! Someone speaks the truth!!!

[Anonymous]

FCPS Immersion teaches Math, Science and Health in the target language. I taught immersion for many years, here, and abroad. My elementary students could carry a conversation with teachers and classmates by 2nd grade. They only had social studies and language arts in ther “home” language. All other subjects were taught in English (Maths, social studies, science, language arts, music and art). I still do not understand why fcps does not teach language arts in the target language as well. We are a bilingual (Spanish) family, and did consider fcps immersion, but then decided against it, because of their focus on science, math, and health only.

[Anonymous]

I don't know about you guys, but the foreign language curriculum and teachers at my kid's school are awful. The are teaching Spanish in the most nonsensical way. I do not think that these teachers are capable of creating an actual lesson plan, to be honest. Before you all get on me about this, I must add I have a PhD in a foreign language and have taught for nineteen years. They do not teach an immersion pedagogy. It is not communicative. It is not even the Berlitz method! They do not assign homework or a study guide for the students. I have no idea what they are doing in the class unless my kid brings her folder home, and when she did, the "curriculum" was so disorganized and looked like they were flying by the seat of their pants. Who teaches past perfect tenses before you even get to the present tense? I've taught in an immersion environment and you just don't do this. It seems that the teachers lean on the native speakers to pretend that they are actually making some progress with the students, but if anything, when I would listen into my kid's classes when they were doing distance learning, it was completely half-baked. The teacher was basically asking them questions like "What is rojo, Susie?" Susie would respond, "Uhhhh, red?" And then the teacher would respond, "!Muy bien!" That was the whole class for the thirty minutes each week. It is horrible. They should just get rid of it if they can't invest in a real language curriculum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about you guys, but the foreign language curriculum and teachers at my kid's school are awful. The are teaching Spanish in the most nonsensical way. I do not think that these teachers are capable of creating an actual lesson plan, to be honest. Before you all get on me about this, I must add I have a PhD in a foreign language and have taught for nineteen years. They do not teach an immersion pedagogy. It is not communicative. It is not even the Berlitz method! They do not assign homework or a study guide for the students. I have no idea what they are doing in the class unless my kid brings her folder home, and when she did, the "curriculum" was so disorganized and looked like they were flying by the seat of their pants. Who teaches past perfect tenses before you even get to the present tense? I've taught in an immersion environment and you just don't do this. It seems that the teachers lean on the native speakers to pretend that they are actually making some progress with the students, but if anything, when I would listen into my kid's classes when they were doing distance learning, it was completely half-baked. The teacher was basically asking them questions like "What is rojo, Susie?" Susie would respond, "Uhhhh, red?" And then the teacher would respond, "!Muy bien!" That was the whole class for the thirty minutes each week. It is horrible. They should just get rid of it if they can't invest in a real language curriculum

+1, foreign language classes in US high schools are generally not good.

LCPS produced a study several years ago that showed the students that took a Spanish in elementary, were no better off once they got to high school then students that had not.

In addition I think one of the other big differences is that LCPS has 6th grade in middle school. Students get that transition year into middle school and then LCPS strongly encourages students to take a foreign language in seventh grade. I don't have the data but I would estimate that 50% of the students take a foreign language and this is based on teaching with LCPS middle schools for 10 years.

I now teach 6th grade in FCPS. Parents are very reluctant to have them start a foreign language in 7th grade because many of them are already taking algebra and transitioning to the middle school environment. I teach in an AAP classroom and I would estimate that approximately 10% of my students take a foreign language in 7th grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know about you guys, but the foreign language curriculum and teachers at my kid's school are awful. The are teaching Spanish in the most nonsensical way. I do not think that these teachers are capable of creating an actual lesson plan, to be honest. Before you all get on me about this, I must add I have a PhD in a foreign language and have taught for nineteen years. They do not teach an immersion pedagogy. It is not communicative. It is not even the Berlitz method! They do not assign homework or a study guide for the students. I have no idea what they are doing in the class unless my kid brings her folder home, and when she did, the "curriculum" was so disorganized and looked like they were flying by the seat of their pants. Who teaches past perfect tenses before you even get to the present tense? I've taught in an immersion environment and you just don't do this. It seems that the teachers lean on the native speakers to pretend that they are actually making some progress with the students, but if anything, when I would listen into my kid's classes when they were doing distance learning, it was completely half-baked. The teacher was basically asking them questions like "What is rojo, Susie?" Susie would respond, "Uhhhh, red?" And then the teacher would respond, "!Muy bien!" That was the whole class for the thirty minutes each week. It is horrible. They should just get rid of it if they can't invest in a real language curriculum

+1, foreign language classes in US high schools are generally not good.

LCPS produced a study several years ago that showed the students that took a Spanish in elementary, were no better off once they got to high school then students that had not.

In addition I think one of the other big differences is that LCPS has 6th grade in middle school. Students get that transition year into middle school and then LCPS strongly encourages students to take a foreign language in seventh grade. I don't have the data but I would estimate that 50% of the students take a foreign language and this is based on teaching with LCPS middle schools for 10 years.

I now teach 6th grade in FCPS. Parents are very reluctant to have them start a foreign language in 7th grade because many of them are already taking algebra and transitioning to the middle school environment. I teach in an AAP classroom and I would estimate that approximately 10% of my students take a foreign language in 7th grade.

This was a lunchroom conversation pre-covid. I teach at one of the immersion ms feeders. We all thought that if FCPS had any sense they would eliminate the program. There are some super committed parents (most of whom are bilingual or have some cultural tie to the language), but it is a “nice to have” that has sailed its course in FCPS. In ES, the immersion class sizes end up being small (to the detriment of the gen ed classes) in the upper grades. The kids don’t actually learn enough grammar to set them up to be any more successful than the kids who start in MS. You have to have people at Willow Oaks/Gatehouse to oversee the program. It often creates a divide among ES kids (the # of times I’ve heard “are you having an orientation just for immersion parents”). Much like IB, it is a way for parents to get out of an ES they deem undesirable . Immersion my have been fine in the robust budget times, but when you aren’t even able to give teachers their steps/cola raises most years, it is time to trim the fat. Immersion is definitely fat.

[Anonymous]

My kids' FCPS middle school offers Spanish 1 and Spanish 2, not just Spanish 1A and Spanish 1B.

They also offer French, but it is split into part A and part B I students take it in seventh grade.

[Anonymous]

DS is participating in Japanese Immersion. I know he is not learning day to day language and is focused on math and science. I am aware that lots of the kids who take Japanese in middle school are surprised at how hard it is because they are learning the basics, like food, clothes, and the like. The bid advantage he will have is that he has learned the different alphabets and has practice with writing and reading. We love it for him because it is a different type of challenge which he needed.

I like that he could finish his language requirement earlier in high school, freeing space for electives.

The JI classes at his school are larger then the gen Ed classes, at least until 4th or 5th.

I love the program and think it has given my son a nice extra challenge. I don’t expect him to be fluent but I do think it gives him a bit of a head start in the language.

[Anonymous]

I just wish my kid's high school French teacher would work on their conversational French. It's been four years and DC can barely speak the language (but can read and write it pretty well).