Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

You don't have to give up AAP. My kids have/had level IV AAP and immersion - in smaller class size than average.

You have to give up AAP at a center which would be a much better experience than level IV at an immersion school

I looked into AAP and I was not impressed. The main benefit is that your kid is around other motivated, intelligent kids. But you get exactly the same benefit from immersion. The immersion kids are smart kids who want to be there and want to learn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked for a long time in an immersion school and it was clear the kids were not developing fluency but they did get vocabulary and learned some. I studied the target language for a long time and would sometimes speak to immersion kids in the language and it was clear they couldn’t respond. It also means your kid is with the same group of kids every year and that is often not a good thing. I’d certainly pick AAP over immersion, although I am sure everyone has different experiences.

It’s quite shocking how little of the language these kids learn. It’s a total waste of money for FCPS. There are many superior programs with lower disruption. I hope immersion is killed soon.

It would save no money to cancel immersion. Those kids will be in an FCPS classroom somewhere - if not in immersion, then in a regular classroom - and FCPS has to pay teachers either way. Far as I know, immersion teachers are not paid more than regular teachers.

Anonymous wrote:It basically sounds like another ESOL program in addition to the one we spend over $100 million+/ year on now. Just great.

Japanese, Korean, French, and German are not really ESOL programs. But I appreciate your attempt to negate otehr peoples experiences.

Not to mention, if the Spanish LI programs help native Spanish speakers do better in school while introducing the langauge to native English speakers, that is a win win. It would be interesting to compare the grades and test scores from the Spanish speaking kids involved in LI vs the kids in the ESOL program only and see the outcomes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

You don't have to give up AAP. My kids have/had level IV AAP and immersion - in smaller class size than average.

You have to give up AAP at a center which would be a much better experience than level IV at an immersion school

My kid was at a LI program without LLIV and he did just fine. The Advanced Math group turned into it's own class in 5th grade. Most of the kids qualified for Algebra 1H. He moved into the AAP classes without a hiccup, straight A's. I doubt that LIV at the Center would have been that much better then what he learned in his LI program. And he was exposed to another language, which he has found to be very manageable in MS. He didn't ahve to leave the program fluent at 6th grade, he need to be hearing it and speaking it enough to start to understand it. It gave hima very dfferent type of challenge in ES, which we appreciated. I am glad that you appreciated the AAP experience, LI was great for my kid.

The ones that do better have a parent at home fluent in the immersion language and they go somewhere to spend part of their summer immersed in the language. The parents also actively get books in the immersion language to read together.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

You don't have to give up AAP. My kids have/had level IV AAP and immersion - in smaller class size than average.

You have to give up AAP at a center which would be a much better experience than level IV at an immersion school

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

You don't have to give up AAP. My kids have/had level IV AAP and immersion - in smaller class size than average.

Agree. It's no longer one or the other.

Also, some kids don't benefit much from AAP. It's not challenging enough for them.

Anonymous wrote:I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

You don't have to give up AAP. My kids have/had level IV AAP and immersion - in smaller class size than average.

It basically sounds like another ESOL program in addition to the one we spend over $100 million+/ year on now. Just great.

I always chuckle when parents are so excited about their kid doing it. It’s a total waste of time and AAP is far superior. I would never give up AAP for that.

Anonymous wrote:I worked for a long time in an immersion school and it was clear the kids were not developing fluency but they did get vocabulary and learned some. I studied the target language for a long time and would sometimes speak to immersion kids in the language and it was clear they couldn’t respond. It also means your kid is with the same group of kids every year and that is often not a good thing. I’d certainly pick AAP over immersion, although I am sure everyone has different experiences.

It’s quite shocking how little of the language these kids learn. It’s a total waste of money for FCPS. There are many superior programs with lower disruption. I hope immersion is killed soon.

My kids did French immersion, we don't speak it at home, and neither came out fluent. However we didn't expect that and they get get all the stimulation and language acquisition benefits that learning multiple languages in childhood offer. My older son has breezed through French 1-3in 7-9 grades so far, which I doubt he would have done without the foundation of immersion, and is now close to fluent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids can understand a heck of a lot of the target language. Their speaking didn’t get very good until middle school though. We went into it knowing they were getting more exposure than they would otherwise, and don’t expect fluency. They all have great accents when they do speak, and are thrilled at the idea of visit g places where the language is spoken.
I see it as a holistic experience- not just a chance to be fluent

Sounds like a "nice to have" program that is not worth the dollars spent by FCPS.

If that's your angle having this program saves on ESL services at least for Spanish.

I worked for a long time in an immersion school and it was clear the kids were not developing fluency but they did get vocabulary and learned some. I studied the target language for a long time and would sometimes speak to immersion kids in the language and it was clear they couldn’t respond. It also means your kid is with the same group of kids every year and that is often not a good thing. I’d certainly pick AAP over immersion, although I am sure everyone has different experiences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not quite sure yet. DD is finishing up 3rd grade. They are allowed to use Google translate in class so I don't think that is super helpful. She can understand spoken pretty well, not very confident in speaking to have a conversation. We only speak English at home so only exposure is at school.

In the classroom, they are listening to the teacher who is speaking the language while teaching, but their opportunities to reply, or have a back and forth conversation are somewhat limited.

Listening and doing a subject in another language exercises the brain in a good way. Language fluency is not the point of immersion. Go overseas and/or full time foreign language school if fluency is your short term goal. Otherwise, convince your student to stay with it through the end of high school.