Anonymous wrote:Yes!!! Seriously!!
I was @ most recent meeting about this- those same parents, from 10 years ago were @ meeting. It’s not a simple as dual language vs. English only

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the story was poorly done - I’m still not sure why low income families don’t want dual language. The only reason they gave was bc they don’t have time to help with homework, but I don’t speak Spanish and wouldn’t be able to help my kid with Spanish homework either. Seemed like wapo wanted to just debate the issue without proviiding all the facts.

Because if you are not at grade level in your native language and have poor test scores in English and Math, dual language is not a good fit. it's not like speaking two-languages brings advantages just by itself otherwise the local Latino students would overall be doing a lot better at DCPS, at most schools AA and Latino families are two subgroups that need more support. This argument is never clearly articulated when talking about the introduction of dual-language programs.

There are at least 50 peer reviewed studies that find that learning a second language improves performance in the first. The idea that poor children can't handle a second language is nonsense unsupported by research.

What has proven true all over the city is that putting a dual language program in a gentrified neighborhood tends to keep the middle class IB residents in the school, pushing out everyone else. This is why the city has had to introduce dual language lotteries. African American OOB residents who don't have a child at the school already lose access.

Anonymous wrote:
Oddly, whites seem to be allied around here with Hispanics and want Spanish. But if you didn't really like Latinos why would you want to learn their language? Makes perfect sense.

Anonymous wrote:It is xenophobic and stupid to assume immersion programs will hurt English and math education. I’m glad that there are some that decide immersion is not for them, but making uniformed blanket statements about how it is a bad choose is just dumb dumb dumb and xenophobic.

Anonymous wrote:It is xenophobic and stupid to assume immersion programs will hurt English and math education. I’m glad that there are some that decide immersion is not for them, but making uniformed blanket statements about how it is a bad choose is just dumb dumb dumb and xenophobic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen a response to the sensible question asking why they don't keep Tyler the way it is, half-English and half-Spanish. Is something wrong with the current system?

Some people would prefer Tyler to go all bilingual because they think every kid in the boundary should get to learn another language.
Some want it so poorer-performing kids opt out for charters or other DCPS schools and the test scores at Tyler can rise.
Some probably live on Capitol Hill either ib for Tyler or out of bounds and struck out for other immersion schools and want more bilingual seats near them.

I get that there is a desire for more bilingual elementary seats and think DCPS should look into ways to offer them--Houston was a great start. But making Tyler all bilingual and not offering a guaranteed English-only alternative at a school that people view as at least comparable seems like a pretty bad way to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen a response to the sensible question asking why they don't keep Tyler the way it is, half-English and half-Spanish. Is something wrong with the current system?

Some people would prefer Tyler to go all bilingual because they think every kid in the boundary should get to learn another language.
Some want it so poorer-performing kids opt out for charters or other DCPS schools and the test scores at Tyler can rise.
Some probably live on Capitol Hill either ib for Tyler or out of bounds and struck out for other immersion schools and want more bilingual seats near them.

I get that there is a desire for more bilingual elementary seats and think DCPS should look into ways to offer them--Houston was a great start. But making Tyler all bilingual and not offering a guaranteed English-only alternative at a school that people view as at least comparable seems like a pretty bad way to do it.

I don't think this is true. There are more OOB students in the immersion program. If in boundary kids wanted this, they would be taking more spots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen a response to the sensible question asking why they don't keep Tyler the way it is, half-English and half-Spanish. Is something wrong with the current system?

Some people would prefer Tyler to go all bilingual because they think every kid in the boundary should get to learn another language.
Some want it so poorer-performing kids opt out for charters or other DCPS schools and the test scores at Tyler can rise.
Some probably live on Capitol Hill either ib for Tyler or out of bounds and struck out for other immersion schools and want more bilingual seats near them.

I get that there is a desire for more bilingual elementary seats and think DCPS should look into ways to offer them--Houston was a great start. But making Tyler all bilingual and not offering a guaranteed English-only alternative at a school that people view as at least comparable seems like a pretty bad way to do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the story was poorly done - I’m still not sure why low income families don’t want dual language. The only reason they gave was bc they don’t have time to help with homework, but I don’t speak Spanish and wouldn’t be able to help my kid with Spanish homework either. Seemed like wapo wanted to just debate the issue without proviiding all the facts.

Because if you are not at grade level in your native language and have poor test scores in English and Math, dual language is not a good fit. it's not like speaking two-languages brings advantages just by itself otherwise the local Latino students would overall be doing a lot better at DCPS, at most schools AA and Latino families are two subgroups that need more support. This argument is never clearly articulated when talking about the introduction of dual-language programs.

There are at least 50 peer reviewed studies that find that learning a second language improves performance in the first. The idea that poor children can't handle a second language is nonsense unsupported by research.

What has proven true all over the city is that putting a dual language program in a gentrified neighborhood tends to keep the middle class IB residents in the school, pushing out everyone else. This is why the city has had to introduce dual language lotteries. African American OOB residents who don't have a child at the school already lose access.

All very true, but leave it to our local populists to prove the earth is flat.

NP. Do those 50 studies look at learning in an immersion model, or simply at learning another language? I'm not disputing that learning a second language improves linguistic skills in general (I'm a multilingual immigrant), but it seems unlikely that learning subjects (math, science, humanities) in a new language would not make this learning more difficult, and wouldn't at least somewhat impede progress in perfecting mastery of your native language until you are truly comfortable in the target language.

Also, are there private schools that offer an immersion model along the lines public and charter schools do? And why have no schools in Upper NW tried it? It sure does seem like it is primarily a strategy to keep high-SES families in the local schools, even if there are benefits supported by research.

NP. I went and read several of the studies around dual immersion when I was considering education options for my kids. PPs statement about the 50 studies and what they supposedly show wildly exaggerates the available literature. I decided against immersion, incidentally.

I also studied about immersion, and was raised bilingually. I’m happy we have had the opportunity to also raise our children in a multi-lingual household, and they attend an immersion school. I’m not saying immersion is for everyone, but it has been outstanding for us. I believe in the science behind immersion, and am happy we have the chance to send our kids to such a school.

Are you a native speaker of the language that your children are learning?

When you say you "believe the science," what do you mean? Have you read the actual studies about second languages and immersion?

I am a native speaker.

I believe in science and I informed myself, which I suggest you do as well.

What I do not understand is magical thinking. I work EXTREMELY hard outside of school to supplement my children’s education in both of their languages. We travel to Spanish speaking countries. We ensure they’re doing excellently in all core subjects. I don’t care what school they attend (and they attend an amazing immersion school), any child can slip through the cracks.

So while I find it laughable that idiots on here think learning a foreign language hurts your math skills or whatever (hysterical and Par for the course in these xenophobic times), I also find it hysterical when parents drop off a elementary age kid with zero or minimal background at an immersion school and expect magic.

As I mentioned in my original post, I did in fact search out and read the science on immersion programs. I am not sure why you felt it necessary to ignore that part of my post (defensive?). What I found first and foremost was a lot of shoddy studies. This is social science, not known for academic rigor, but the dual immersion studies are pretty bad even among that cohort. I think to be honest there's a lot of magical thinking going on among immersion proponents. There's not, for instance, what PP claimed supports immersion ("at least 50 peer reviewed studies that find that learning a second language improves performance in the first"), particularly if you exclude studies with bad statistical analysis.

Also I am not heritage dad or some of the other posters on here. I don't even know who heritage dad is. I am just somebody who evaluated immersion for my kids based on an evaluation of the research out there, and found that it was mostly quite weak and far less compelling than some of the proponents of immersion would have you believe.

No you chose to not believe the science behind immersion. That’s fine. Good for you.

I actually applaud people who don’t just go for the most desirable schools out there. I can’t tell you how many times people have told me their first or second grader will “do just fine” at the immersion school without speaking any of the language. I just know what I read, the research I did, and what I see with my own and other children. I think you somehow expect me to link every article and study I read to prove your point wrong- but you’ve simply chosen to say what you saw “is weak”. Feel free to say what you want to say to justify your own choices. But I know what I read and the studies say what they say. You can choose to believe what you want.

NP. I think the PP doesn't expect you to link to studies to prove someone's point wrong, she just expects you not to insult people as xenophobic "idiots", and call it laughable when others express concerns about the potential downsides of immersion or don't agree that the research is as strong as you think it is. Your gratuitous rudeness and condescension come across as either defensive or arrogant, or both. (And for the record, I'm multilingual and an immigrant, so definitely no xenophobe or opposed to language immersion.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d be ticked if my school switched to immersion. I believe there can be value, but be honest I just haven’t been impressed with most of the immersion programs I’ve seen in DCPS and DCPCS.

And the number of immersion programs your children have attended is... let me guess ... zero?

Correct! We checked out several DC immersion schools years ago with particular interest in 1 language both DH and I studied. Unfortunately the language skills of children we met were astonishingly poor considering they had attended this school for 6+ years. Would you send your child to a school where you weren’t impressed with the outcome?

Heritage Dad strikes again! Ban him!

I’m so sick of this guy.

I’m the poster you’re referring to, I’m not Heritage Dad - didn’t he earn his name because it’s his native language? As stated, DH and I both studied the language of interest (which isn’t Chinese) we are not native speakers. Sorry to tell you there’s more 1 person isn’t impressed with the city’s immersion options.

If you’re Not heritage dad, you’re equally annoying and your posts are worthless.

NP here, this is why your children will never become fluent in your target language. You’re too preoccupied with attacking anyone who doesn’t drink the kool aid rather than demanding excellence from the school.

Isn’t school closed for the summer?

How long exactly does it take you to post? I think you can demand excellence from your school and read DCUM?

Other posters and I have said we don’t think immersion is for everyone. But Immersion has been great for us.

Anonymous wrote:I haven't seen a response to the sensible question asking why they don't keep Tyler the way it is, half-English and half-Spanish. Is something wrong with the current system?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought the story was poorly done - I’m still not sure why low income families don’t want dual language. The only reason they gave was bc they don’t have time to help with homework, but I don’t speak Spanish and wouldn’t be able to help my kid with Spanish homework either. Seemed like wapo wanted to just debate the issue without proviiding all the facts.

Because if you are not at grade level in your native language and have poor test scores in English and Math, dual language is not a good fit. it's not like speaking two-languages brings advantages just by itself otherwise the local Latino students would overall be doing a lot better at DCPS, at most schools AA and Latino families are two subgroups that need more support. This argument is never clearly articulated when talking about the introduction of dual-language programs.

There are at least 50 peer reviewed studies that find that learning a second language improves performance in the first. The idea that poor children can't handle a second language is nonsense unsupported by research.

What has proven true all over the city is that putting a dual language program in a gentrified neighborhood tends to keep the middle class IB residents in the school, pushing out everyone else. This is why the city has had to introduce dual language lotteries. African American OOB residents who don't have a child at the school already lose access.

All very true, but leave it to our local populists to prove the earth is flat.

NP. Do those 50 studies look at learning in an immersion model, or simply at learning another language? I'm not disputing that learning a second language improves linguistic skills in general (I'm a multilingual immigrant), but it seems unlikely that learning subjects (math, science, humanities) in a new language would not make this learning more difficult, and wouldn't at least somewhat impede progress in perfecting mastery of your native language until you are truly comfortable in the target language.

Also, are there private schools that offer an immersion model along the lines public and charter schools do? And why have no schools in Upper NW tried it? It sure does seem like it is primarily a strategy to keep high-SES families in the local schools, even if there are benefits supported by research.

NP. I went and read several of the studies around dual immersion when I was considering education options for my kids. PPs statement about the 50 studies and what they supposedly show wildly exaggerates the available literature. I decided against immersion, incidentally.

I also studied about immersion, and was raised bilingually. I’m happy we have had the opportunity to also raise our children in a multi-lingual household, and they attend an immersion school. I’m not saying immersion is for everyone, but it has been outstanding for us. I believe in the science behind immersion, and am happy we have the chance to send our kids to such a school.

Are you a native speaker of the language that your children are learning?

When you say you "believe the science," what do you mean? Have you read the actual studies about second languages and immersion?

I am a native speaker.

I believe in science and I informed myself, which I suggest you do as well.

What I do not understand is magical thinking. I work EXTREMELY hard outside of school to supplement my children’s education in both of their languages. We travel to Spanish speaking countries. We ensure they’re doing excellently in all core subjects. I don’t care what school they attend (and they attend an amazing immersion school), any child can slip through the cracks.

So while I find it laughable that idiots on here think learning a foreign language hurts your math skills or whatever (hysterical and Par for the course in these xenophobic times), I also find it hysterical when parents drop off a elementary age kid with zero or minimal background at an immersion school and expect magic.

As I mentioned in my original post, I did in fact search out and read the science on immersion programs. I am not sure why you felt it necessary to ignore that part of my post (defensive?). What I found first and foremost was a lot of shoddy studies. This is social science, not known for academic rigor, but the dual immersion studies are pretty bad even among that cohort. I think to be honest there's a lot of magical thinking going on among immersion proponents. There's not, for instance, what PP claimed supports immersion ("at least 50 peer reviewed studies that find that learning a second language improves performance in the first"), particularly if you exclude studies with bad statistical analysis.

Also I am not heritage dad or some of the other posters on here. I don't even know who heritage dad is. I am just somebody who evaluated immersion for my kids based on an evaluation of the research out there, and found that it was mostly quite weak and far less compelling than some of the proponents of immersion would have you believe.

No you chose to not believe the science behind immersion. That’s fine. Good for you.

I actually applaud people who don’t just go for the most desirable schools out there. I can’t tell you how many times people have told me their first or second grader will “do just fine” at the immersion school without speaking any of the language. I just know what I read, the research I did, and what I see with my own and other children. I think you somehow expect me to link every article and study I read to prove your point wrong- but you’ve simply chosen to say what you saw “is weak”. Feel free to say what you want to say to justify your own choices. But I know what I read and the studies say what they say. You can choose to believe what you want.