Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My child is in an elementary language immersion program in a school that is not in our region in any of the proposed models. Further, the middle school they feed into is also not in our region.

Has anyone seen any information on what is going to happen to kids who are supposed to be going into middle school the year the regional model is implemented?

Won't be applicable to me, but what about the younger elementary immersion kids? Do they get to stay in their ES?

I’m sorry but why you would you even put your kid in this situation? Lemme guess you’re a white family bussing your kid away from your majority Hispanic home ES to learn Spanish somewhere else in the county on MY dime?!?

There are no immersion HS in MCPS so if you are trying it in ES you must think you’re gaining the system somehow. Dot he research and stop complaining here

lol. amazing.

You are making quite an assumption here. My home ES is 36% white with 22% FARMS, and my child's immersion school is 16% white with 44% FARMS.

What I am trying to do is avoid having my child start 6th grade next year in their immersion feeder middle school (White Oak MS) and then be forced to change to a different middle school the next year--either back to our non-immersion home middle school or to the immersion middle school (Westland MS) which will be in our new region.

I am looking for consistency in where my child goes to school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am also very interested in this question and I wonder if there’s any chance of them being expanded so there’s at least one option per region. I realize there would be challenges to doing so.

I honestly think this is what they would have done (added a middle school immersion program, a middle school math/science magnet, and a middle school humanities magnet in every region) if it weren't for the MSDE math minutes mandate thing. But the mandate will probably mean that they will drop down to 1 or 1.5 elective periods per student per year starting in 2027-2028, and I don't know that magnet programs and immersion will survive that. (Heck, I don't know that *foreign language* in middle school will survive that-- probably not any language besides Spanish, anyway, since on average middle schools only have a section or two of French of Chinese and a lot of students will likely pass on foreign language if it means they can't take band/orchestra or other electives they're interested in.)

This is part of why I hate the MSDE middle school math mandate and am constantly e-mailing people about it to try to get it rolled back-- no luck yet. If you agree, contact the MD State Board of Ed, your state legislators, and ask MCPS Board of Ed members and MCPS leadership to lobby the state to roll it back too...

Don’t kids who are behind in math already have to take a second math resource class and only one elective? Seems like they should not need to mandate more math across the board especially at the expense of a well-rounded education. We already wait really late to teach kids a second language compared to other countries.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am also very interested in this question and I wonder if there’s any chance of them being expanded so there’s at least one option per region. I realize there would be challenges to doing so.

I honestly think this is what they would have done (added a middle school immersion program, a middle school math/science magnet, and a middle school humanities magnet in every region) if it weren't for the MSDE math minutes mandate thing. But the mandate will probably mean that they will drop down to 1 or 1.5 elective periods per student per year starting in 2027-2028, and I don't know that magnet programs and immersion will survive that. (Heck, I don't know that *foreign language* in middle school will survive that-- probably not any language besides Spanish, anyway, since on average middle schools only have a section or two of French of Chinese and a lot of students will likely pass on foreign language if it means they can't take band/orchestra or other electives they're interested in.)

This is part of why I hate the MSDE middle school math mandate and am constantly e-mailing people about it to try to get it rolled back-- no luck yet. If you agree, contact the MD State Board of Ed, your state legislators, and ask MCPS Board of Ed members and MCPS leadership to lobby the state to roll it back too...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am also very interested in this question and I wonder if there’s any chance of them being expanded so there’s at least one option per region. I realize there would be challenges to doing so.

I honestly think this is what they would have done (added a middle school immersion program, a middle school math/science magnet, and a middle school humanities magnet in every region) if it weren't for the MSDE math minutes mandate thing. But the mandate will probably mean that they will drop down to 1 or 1.5 elective periods per student per year starting in 2027-2028, and I don't know that magnet programs and immersion will survive that. (Heck, I don't know that *foreign language* in middle school will survive that-- probably not any language besides Spanish, anyway, since on average middle schools only have a section or two of French of Chinese and a lot of students will likely pass on foreign language if it means they can't take band/orchestra or other electives they're interested in.)

Anonymous wrote:I am also very interested in this question and I wonder if there’s any chance of them being expanded so there’s at least one option per region. I realize there would be challenges to doing so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"

The OWI French program celebrated it's 50th anniversary last year, FYI. Not a new program.

Don't worry they will use the TWI evaluation to justify ending the old programs too

Sounds like this is your hope. Don’t know how grounded in reality it is.

It's not my hope at all. I just see that Taylor likes to break things and will cite whatever incomplete or irrelevant data he can to justify it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"

The OWI French program celebrated it's 50th anniversary last year, FYI. Not a new program.

Don't worry they will use the TWI evaluation to justify ending the old programs too

Sounds like this is your hope. Don’t know how grounded in reality it is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"

The OWI French program celebrated it's 50th anniversary last year, FYI. Not a new program.

Don't worry they will use the TWI evaluation to justify ending the old programs too

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"

The OWI French program celebrated it's 50th anniversary last year, FYI. Not a new program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think immersion programs have a good shot at surviving. Especially the two-way immersion programs, which have pretty mixed-to-poor academic results.

The poor results are the result of poor implementation as documented in the OSA report. In addition, it's important to note that they only looked at outcomes during elementary school. It's a common finding that immersion students experience lower performance at first, but then their performance increases and exceeds that of their peers later on. That being said, MCPS's TWI programs have not done as well as similar programs in other jurisdictions because MCPS hasn't implemented them effectively. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9903.html

Poor implementation is always the explanation for MCPS's failures.

And while that might be true, if MCPS can't implement a program or policy effectively, than we have to question whether it's a realistic fit for MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think immersion programs have a good shot at surviving. Especially the two-way immersion programs, which have pretty mixed-to-poor academic results.

The poor results are the result of poor implementation as documented in the OSA report. In addition, it's important to note that they only looked at outcomes during elementary school. It's a common finding that immersion students experience lower performance at first, but then their performance increases and exceeds that of their peers later on. That being said, MCPS's TWI programs have not done as well as similar programs in other jurisdictions because MCPS hasn't implemented them effectively. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9903.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"

The OWI French program celebrated it's 50th anniversary last year, FYI. Not a new program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree that it's a real possibility they will eliminate these programs. The Office of Shared Accountability put out a report early last year about the Two Way Immersion programs and some negative outcomes in them. I think they are setting the stage to eliminate them. I hope they don't and instead figure out how to properly support these programs (the report noted a ton of problems with the implementation), but they cost money to support. And if they are trying to make opportunities the same across the county (an equality model, not an equity model) these programs are not evenly distributed.

They absolutely should eliminate these programs. MCPS can’t even teach kids how to read in any language! There is NO MONEY for these fluff programs.

And yet there's money to create another 30+ new regional programs. How magic!

+100
The TWI programs are not even a decade old. This is just MCPS being MCPS - instead of practicing thoughtful implementation and building on what they have (and fixing the problems), they are just tearing things down to bring in shiny new expensive things that they can take credit for when they apply to their cushy edtech jobs. Implementation will be a disaster and they won't be properly resourced, just like the current programs, so in less than a decade someone else will come in and say "Look, this isn't working, let's eliminate it and create something new (that will also fail but we'll be gone by then, har har)"