Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry you can’t hear in the back. The goal of immersions is NOT language fluency. I’ve explained this upthread. Go read up on the benefits of immersion.

If language acquisition is your goal for your child, then then they need to be in a school where the target language is spoken exclusively.

No arguments on the benefits of immersion.

I disagree that the target language needs to be spoken exclusively. During college I asked about how some of my colleagues learned English - mostly from Hollywood blockbusters.

And... from living in a country where English was the primary language was spoken.

Go live in Latin America and you'll pick up Spanish pretty quickly.

How do people live the US for decades and still don't know English?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry you can’t hear in the back. The goal of immersions is NOT language fluency. I’ve explained this upthread. Go read up on the benefits of immersion.

If language acquisition is your goal for your child, then then they need to be in a school where the target language is spoken exclusively.

Anonymous wrote:

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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry you can’t hear in the back. The goal of immersions is NOT language fluency. I’ve explained this upthread. Go read up on the benefits of immersion.

If language acquisition is your goal for your child, then then they need to be in a school where the target language is spoken exclusively.

No arguments on the benefits of immersion.

I disagree that the target language needs to be spoken exclusively. During college I asked about how some of my colleagues learned English - mostly from Hollywood blockbusters.

And... from living in a country where English was the primary language was spoken.

Go live in Latin America and you'll pick up Spanish pretty quickly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry you can’t hear in the back. The goal of immersions is NOT language fluency. I’ve explained this upthread. Go read up on the benefits of immersion.

If language acquisition is your goal for your child, then then they need to be in a school where the target language is spoken exclusively.

No arguments on the benefits of immersion.

I disagree that the target language needs to be spoken exclusively. During college I asked about how some of my colleagues learned English - mostly from Hollywood blockbusters.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry you can’t hear in the back. The goal of immersions is NOT language fluency. I’ve explained this upthread. Go read up on the benefits of immersion.

If language acquisition is your goal for your child, then then they need to be in a school where the target language is spoken exclusively.

Anonymous wrote:I work at a Title 1 school. When students come in from Central America with no English, what classroom do you think they’re put into? The Spanish immersion classroom or the English speaking classroom? You guessed it, Spanish immersion.

At the school, I work at it is less an immersion program and more of a bridge for ELL students.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Immersion has more kids whose parents are looking for ways to challenge their kids and are actively engaged. I don't think that the kids have much say in being in the program or not, that is a parental decision in K or 1st grade. The kids tend to have parents who are paying attention to what is happening in school and working with their kids to stay on track. Kids who are struggling with skills in English are encouraged to move to the regular class because they need to be more focused on reading and math then trying to add in another language. You are less likely to end up with kids who are struggling or behind in the LI classes for that reason. It allows the class to move at a pace needed to meet the standards and introduce a new language.

That said, our LI program ended up with over half of the kids in advanced math and most of those being in a position to choose Algebra 1 in 7th grade or not. It is, in many ways, similar to LIV.

This exactly. My kids can understand quite a bit in their target language even if they don't speak it well. They also have a class of kids whose parents were in tune enough to register for a lottery on time and care about their kids branching out from the basic curriculum. Most of the kids who struggled have moved to English language only classes so their class is smaller than most and doesn't spend as much time going over things repeatedly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Immersion has more kids whose parents are looking for ways to challenge their kids and are actively engaged. I don't think that the kids have much say in being in the program or not, that is a parental decision in K or 1st grade. The kids tend to have parents who are paying attention to what is happening in school and working with their kids to stay on track. Kids who are struggling with skills in English are encouraged to move to the regular class because they need to be more focused on reading and math then trying to add in another language. You are less likely to end up with kids who are struggling or behind in the LI classes for that reason. It allows the class to move at a pace needed to meet the standards and introduce a new language.

That said, our LI program ended up with over half of the kids in advanced math and most of those being in a position to choose Algebra 1 in 7th grade or not. It is, in many ways, similar to LIV.

Anonymous wrote:

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.