Anonymous wrote:Because the challenges of immersion study deters most parents of FARMs students from applying to charters, unless they speak the target language at home (Spanish).

With immersion in the mix, you get an overwhelmingly SES student bodies at a few charters (e.g. YuYing, 10% FARMs) like at JKLM, Brent etc.

Also, immersion adds extra challenge in a city without formal GT programs.

Immersion works to get high SES parents what they want when they can't afford Upper NW or the priciest Cap Hill real estate. Few will admit this but that's the story.

Total BS.

Pathway through to HS has become a strong reason. Since no other charter has this.

We prioritized commute. We live by Hearst and started going there before it was a school people really wanted to attend. It's been great. I don't want my kids or us sitting in the car for 30 or more minutes each way to school.

Do what works best for you and don't worry about everyone else.

Anonymous wrote:There is also a subset of people who think that their kid is so smart that they need the additional challenge that language immersion provides (in a city with no test-in school options until high school).

This. And to get access to DCI.

Because the challenges of immersion study deters most parents of FARMs students from applying to charters, unless they speak the target language at home (Spanish).

With immersion in the mix, you get an overwhelmingly SES student bodies at a few charters (e.g. YuYing, 10% FARMs) like at JKLM, Brent etc.

Also, immersion adds extra challenge in a city without formal GT programs.

Immersion works to get high SES parents what they want when they can't afford Upper NW or the priciest Cap Hill real estate. Few will admit this but that's the story.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's how you avoid the stupid, unmotivated kids in the general program.

+1

Because it's the only way to go to a "good" elementary school in DC.

OK this is offensive and ridiculous. Stupid and unmotivated kids? Come on. If you must be insulting, these kids can be in any language.

But my answer is, I have always worked/studied internationally whenever possible, and am well aware of the advantages of learning languages early on as well as how common it is globally for people to grow up with multiple languages. I thought it was because others are like me, in global DC. That's for those coming from US, monolingual.

My spouse learned a second language at age 3 (by moving to a new country) and picked up a couple of additional languages fairly easy after that.

I took a second language starting in 8th grade, and always struggled.

We wanted our kid to learn a second language young, and to develop a broader, more global perspective. We are also 1st-gen Americans, so we didn't want her to have a very US-centric worldview.

And, after the presidential election, I thought that by becoming fluent in a second language, she would have an "out" if she ever wanted/needed to leave the US and relocate elsewhere. Only half-kidding.

Kid started this year in language immersion and is already doing pretty well with the language.

Anonymous wrote:That's how you avoid the stupid, unmotivated kids in the general program.

+1

Because it's the only way to go to a "good" elementary school in DC.

I don't for my family. But I am much more supportive of immersion than I am of the one-per-week language classes in non-immersion elementary schools.

There is also a subset of people who think that their kid is so smart that they need the additional challenge that language immersion provides (in a city with no test-in school options until high school).

In a nutshell: it's easier to learn languages when you're young and the brain is still developing the neural pathways associated with language, and the world is increasingly globalized so knowing more languages is always an advantage.

Some parents focused on immersion grew up speaking multiple languages and want the same for their kids; others grew up not taking a foreign language elective until 9th grade and want different for their kids.

You can not predict if your child would struggle or not. Starting a second language at a young age is easier than as an adult. Not saying she would not have struggled but you truly don’t know. I’m sure you thinking that just satisfies your disappointment of not getting in and that is ok

That's how you avoid the stupid, unmotivated kids in the general program.

Google has your answers.

Yes, there is data to show that there are cognitive advantages to learning two languages at an early age.

Many native speakers want their children to know their language, and become truly biliterate.

For some monilingual Americans (myself included) I always wished I had mastered a second language, and immersion was a way to try to get that for my kids.

It also, frankly, made it easier to explain to my flyover country parents and in-laws why I was actually enrolling my kids in a public school in Washington, DC.

Please don't crucify me for asking, but I really don't understand why so many parents prioritize language immersion. I fell prey to this myself and was crushed when we didn't get our top pick in the lottery. However, now that i know my child better, I'm fairly certain DC would have struggled in a dual language environment. And as a result, we would have struggled as a family to support DC.

Are there academic studies that show immersion is really better? Or is this this just the current parent obsession?