Anonymous wrote:I just held a first grade birthday party this weekend. Now I have to figure out which person I need to unvite next year! Dum dum dum...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The same argument OP is making could literally be applied to any subject in school and boils down to opinions about what parental support of education looks like. As your child gets older, you will likely reach a point where you can't really help them with school subjects anymore. That threshold is different for everyone, of course. In most cases, it makes no sense for the parent to learn (or relearn) subjects to support their child. I'm not going to relearn pre-calculus to help my child--I'd rather he get help and support from someone who knows a lot more than me in that subject. Isn't the same true for languages? If I don't know how to speak a language but I want my kids to learn it, me learning the language is only going to go so far to help them--and in some cases might hinder them. But whether I learn how to sing a kid's song in that language--and will actually sing it in public--doesn't mean anything about my support for my child's language learning.

-A parent with kids in a language immersion school that has learned some of the language, including the birthday song, but has never spoken or sung the language in public

I don't have a problem with someone who doesn't speak a language enrolling their kid in language immersion, but disagree that language immersion is no different than a parent not wanting to learn "new math" for 4th graders or not learning enough physics to tutor their high school student. Language immersion IS different, especially when we're talking about immersion at the ECE level, which is when most of these schools are actually doing true immersion.

Ok, so how is it different? How is a parent who doesn’t speak the language going to help their child?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're doing it because it's the best school they got into overall. Or, one parent handles the language stuff but that parent was not at the party.

Some people have more important things going on in their lives, like actual serious problems that are more important.

If you need all parents at your school to be motivated, you're going to be very unhappy in this school system.

This is it, plain and simple. The DC school lottery funnels kids into immersion schools because of push factors, meaning, DCI provides a more solid high school pathway than their IB school or other available DCPS options (that don't require a top 5% lottery draw in one particular year). Some parents don't care about the language at all, but just want that pathway. Others think any language exposure is beneficial, even if their kids never become fluent. Others believe they'll achieve fluency without having to put in any extra effort at home.

Compare with suburban schools that have solid IB options and attract immersion kids through pull factors. Meaning, they want IMMERSION with a longer bus ride more than they want their acceptable neighborhood school. Apples and oranges to DC.

This is sort of true. Some immersion schools absolutely draw in parents who are just looking for a solid school with a good base of invested, involved families and decent test scores.

But in recent years we've seen a proliferation of immersion programs where the school itself is fundamentally flawed, the academics are aggressively bad, and this quickly leads to shedding the families who are education-focused and involved. Take a look at Stokes EE (both languages) and Mundo Verde (especially Calle Ocho, but problems at both campuses). Parents wind up "pushed" to these schools because they assume the quality of education will be higher than it is a their IB or even at non-immersion charters. But these schools have massive problems and many kids aren't learning the language and also aren't learning, period. One factor hitting many immersion (and Montessori) schools is that the teacher shortage is more acute for them because they need teachers with language skills. Well there are less of those. And charters don't always pay teachers well and there's less job security and stability, so you may see a lot of midyear departures, something that is rare in DCPS.

So, sure, if you are getting into YY, LAMB, DCB, Oyster, Marie Reed immersion track -- you are likely getting what you hope. But immersion does not actually equal better academics. In DC, it can actually equal significantly worse academics, because schools can coast with clueless PK families who lottery in thinking they "won" because they got an immersion spot, and only start to wise up in 1st and 2nd when not only do almost none of the kids in class actually speak the language, but also the school's PARCC scores are eye-poppingly bad. And people commute across town for some of these schools!

Immersion has been viewed as a proxy for quality in DC for a while now and the truth is much more complicated than that. Same with charters in general, to some degree (see, i.e. Two Rivers). There are some parents in DC who think they are escaping some horrible travesty by opting into these programs, but it's a house of cards. I'd send my kid to an IB Title 1 in DCPS any day of the week before sending them to MV8th or Stokes EE. But I have an older child and know the difference, and know to look beyond the kids in the PK classroom clapping along to a French counting song. People need to wise up.

My neighbor said the same to me when I chose MV8. Guess who is changing school now in third grade?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The same argument OP is making could literally be applied to any subject in school and boils down to opinions about what parental support of education looks like. As your child gets older, you will likely reach a point where you can't really help them with school subjects anymore. That threshold is different for everyone, of course. In most cases, it makes no sense for the parent to learn (or relearn) subjects to support their child. I'm not going to relearn pre-calculus to help my child--I'd rather he get help and support from someone who knows a lot more than me in that subject. Isn't the same true for languages? If I don't know how to speak a language but I want my kids to learn it, me learning the language is only going to go so far to help them--and in some cases might hinder them. But whether I learn how to sing a kid's song in that language--and will actually sing it in public--doesn't mean anything about my support for my child's language learning.

-A parent with kids in a language immersion school that has learned some of the language, including the birthday song, but has never spoken or sung the language in public

I don't have a problem with someone who doesn't speak a language enrolling their kid in language immersion, but disagree that language immersion is no different than a parent not wanting to learn "new math" for 4th graders or not learning enough physics to tutor their high school student. Language immersion IS different, especially when we're talking about immersion at the ECE level, which is when most of these schools are actually doing true immersion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We're parents who speaks none of the target language, yet my 7 yo is fluent in Spanish having only started learning the language in kindergarten. Since we don't speak the language ourselves, we always have a Spanish speaking au pair who speaks with her before and after school and all summer. We also vacation in Spanish speaking places where she is immersed. She just spent spring break in a kids club where the majority language was Spanish. She also watches TV and gets library books in Spanish. There are many ways to support a language without actually speaking it yourself.

We have been told that she's fluent and speaks without an accent by many, and her teacher says she is on grade level for a native speaking 2nd grader. I have no reason to doubt this, as she's reading Magic Treehouse in Spanish and chatters up a storm with our au pair.

Cool story bro! I see you’re actually trying to support your children, but just fyi, people who are paid to teach your kids spanish aren’t going to be the most reliable sources to determine your kiddos’s ability. When I go to my kids school, they have a different standard for kids whose parents actually speak the target language. Just FYI.

If PP has an au pair, I believe that her kid is fluent. I am a native speaker and I have seen that some of my kids classmate with Spanish speaking Nannie’s/aupair are fluent.
These kids have been speaking Spanish since babies.

Anonymous wrote:The same argument OP is making could literally be applied to any subject in school and boils down to opinions about what parental support of education looks like. As your child gets older, you will likely reach a point where you can't really help them with school subjects anymore. That threshold is different for everyone, of course. In most cases, it makes no sense for the parent to learn (or relearn) subjects to support their child. I'm not going to relearn pre-calculus to help my child--I'd rather he get help and support from someone who knows a lot more than me in that subject. Isn't the same true for languages? If I don't know how to speak a language but I want my kids to learn it, me learning the language is only going to go so far to help them--and in some cases might hinder them. But whether I learn how to sing a kid's song in that language--and will actually sing it in public--doesn't mean anything about my support for my child's language learning.

-A parent with kids in a language immersion school that has learned some of the language, including the birthday song, but has never spoken or sung the language in public

Anonymous wrote:The same argument OP is making could literally be applied to any subject in school and boils down to opinions about what parental support of education looks like. As your child gets older, you will likely reach a point where you can't really help them with school subjects anymore. That threshold is different for everyone, of course. In most cases, it makes no sense for the parent to learn (or relearn) subjects to support their child. I'm not going to relearn pre-calculus to help my child--I'd rather he get help and support from someone who knows a lot more than me in that subject. Isn't the same true for languages? If I don't know how to speak a language but I want my kids to learn it, me learning the language is only going to go so far to help them--and in some cases might hinder them. But whether I learn how to sing a kid's song in that language--and will actually sing it in public--doesn't mean anything about my support for my child's language learning.

-A parent with kids in a language immersion school that has learned some of the language, including the birthday song, but has never spoken or sung the language in public

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're doing it because it's the best school they got into overall. Or, one parent handles the language stuff but that parent was not at the party.

Some people have more important things going on in their lives, like actual serious problems that are more important.

If you need all parents at your school to be motivated, you're going to be very unhappy in this school system.

This is it, plain and simple. The DC school lottery funnels kids into immersion schools because of push factors, meaning, DCI provides a more solid high school pathway than their IB school or other available DCPS options (that don't require a top 5% lottery draw in one particular year). Some parents don't care about the language at all, but just want that pathway. Others think any language exposure is beneficial, even if their kids never become fluent. Others believe they'll achieve fluency without having to put in any extra effort at home.

Compare with suburban schools that have solid IB options and attract immersion kids through pull factors. Meaning, they want IMMERSION with a longer bus ride more than they want their acceptable neighborhood school. Apples and oranges to DC.

This is sort of true. Some immersion schools absolutely draw in parents who are just looking for a solid school with a good base of invested, involved families and decent test scores.

But in recent years we've seen a proliferation of immersion programs where the school itself is fundamentally flawed, the academics are aggressively bad, and this quickly leads to shedding the families who are education-focused and involved. Take a look at Stokes EE (both languages) and Mundo Verde (especially Calle Ocho, but problems at both campuses). Parents wind up "pushed" to these schools because they assume the quality of education will be higher than it is a their IB or even at non-immersion charters. But these schools have massive problems and many kids aren't learning the language and also aren't learning, period. One factor hitting many immersion (and Montessori) schools is that the teacher shortage is more acute for them because they need teachers with language skills. Well there are less of those. And charters don't always pay teachers well and there's less job security and stability, so you may see a lot of midyear departures, something that is rare in DCPS.

So, sure, if you are getting into YY, LAMB, DCB, Oyster, Marie Reed immersion track -- you are likely getting what you hope. But immersion does not actually equal better academics. In DC, it can actually equal significantly worse academics, because schools can coast with clueless PK families who lottery in thinking they "won" because they got an immersion spot, and only start to wise up in 1st and 2nd when not only do almost none of the kids in class actually speak the language, but also the school's PARCC scores are eye-poppingly bad. And people commute across town for some of these schools!

Immersion has been viewed as a proxy for quality in DC for a while now and the truth is much more complicated than that. Same with charters in general, to some degree (see, i.e. Two Rivers). There are some parents in DC who think they are escaping some horrible travesty by opting into these programs, but it's a house of cards. I'd send my kid to an IB Title 1 in DCPS any day of the week before sending them to MV8th or Stokes EE. But I have an older child and know the difference, and know to look beyond the kids in the PK classroom clapping along to a French counting song. People need to wise up.

My neighbor said the same to me when I chose MV8. Guess who is changing school now in third grade?

Hint: It is not me.

If you made it to third grade at MV, then I have no doubt you plan on staying. Most families I know that left did so after a year or two as soon as they got a better lottery offer. There's a big difference between a IB Title 1 family KNOWING they'll have to leave to secure a middle school pathway, and a DCI intended family thinking they'd stay through and realizing they just couldn't. One speaks to dissatisfaction with the feeder, the other with the elementary school itself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, my kids go to an immersion private school and I would be doing them more harm than good trying to learn the language and use the same language at home to support them. I tried in the beginning but they are just leaps and bounds ahead of my ability to learn the it and my pronunciation and grammar are laughable compared to where they are in their ability to speak/read/write that second language. Unfortunately I missed the boat to fluently learn a second language, but my kids will be bilingual and that is what matters to me. They have plenty of ways to use and practice the language outside of school without my help.

OP here. Okay. I guess I must have different relationships with my kids. I want to know what they're learning, and they seem to have a fun time and take pride in trying to teach and correct me in my efforts. I guess I would feel pretty disappointed if (at least at this young age, preK3-2nd grade), I couldn't at least get a basic understanding of what they're learning in school. It seems a lot of parents don't really care about that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, my kids go to an immersion private school and I would be doing them more harm than good trying to learn the language and use the same language at home to support them. I tried in the beginning but they are just leaps and bounds ahead of my ability to learn the it and my pronunciation and grammar are laughable compared to where they are in their ability to speak/read/write that second language. Unfortunately I missed the boat to fluently learn a second language, but my kids will be bilingual and that is what matters to me. They have plenty of ways to use and practice the language outside of school without my help.

OP here. Okay. I guess I must have different relationships with my kids. I want to know what they're learning, and they seem to have a fun time and take pride in trying to teach and correct me in my efforts. I guess I would feel pretty disappointed if (at least at this young age, preK3-2nd grade), I couldn't at least get a basic understanding of what they're learning in school. It seems a lot of parents don't really care about that.

Different strokes. Your parenting style is good for you. You don't need to criticize others' in order to feel better about yourself and your kids. Not sure why you "are struggling" to understand this. Seems like a veiled humble brag. Find something to do that can help build your inner self confidence. If that is learning a new language, so be it.

OP here. Honestly, I am more worried about the culture, like, is it worth it to be at this school. This isn't a humble brag. I'm honestly worried about the culture and fitting in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're doing it because it's the best school they got into overall. Or, one parent handles the language stuff but that parent was not at the party.

Some people have more important things going on in their lives, like actual serious problems that are more important.

If you need all parents at your school to be motivated, you're going to be very unhappy in this school system.

This is it, plain and simple. The DC school lottery funnels kids into immersion schools because of push factors, meaning, DCI provides a more solid high school pathway than their IB school or other available DCPS options (that don't require a top 5% lottery draw in one particular year). Some parents don't care about the language at all, but just want that pathway. Others think any language exposure is beneficial, even if their kids never become fluent. Others believe they'll achieve fluency without having to put in any extra effort at home.

Compare with suburban schools that have solid IB options and attract immersion kids through pull factors. Meaning, they want IMMERSION with a longer bus ride more than they want their acceptable neighborhood school. Apples and oranges to DC.

This is sort of true. Some immersion schools absolutely draw in parents who are just looking for a solid school with a good base of invested, involved families and decent test scores.

But in recent years we've seen a proliferation of immersion programs where the school itself is fundamentally flawed, the academics are aggressively bad, and this quickly leads to shedding the families who are education-focused and involved. Take a look at Stokes EE (both languages) and Mundo Verde (especially Calle Ocho, but problems at both campuses). Parents wind up "pushed" to these schools because they assume the quality of education will be higher than it is a their IB or even at non-immersion charters. But these schools have massive problems and many kids aren't learning the language and also aren't learning, period. One factor hitting many immersion (and Montessori) schools is that the teacher shortage is more acute for them because they need teachers with language skills. Well there are less of those. And charters don't always pay teachers well and there's less job security and stability, so you may see a lot of midyear departures, something that is rare in DCPS.

So, sure, if you are getting into YY, LAMB, DCB, Oyster, Marie Reed immersion track -- you are likely getting what you hope. But immersion does not actually equal better academics. In DC, it can actually equal significantly worse academics, because schools can coast with clueless PK families who lottery in thinking they "won" because they got an immersion spot, and only start to wise up in 1st and 2nd when not only do almost none of the kids in class actually speak the language, but also the school's PARCC scores are eye-poppingly bad. And people commute across town for some of these schools!

Immersion has been viewed as a proxy for quality in DC for a while now and the truth is much more complicated than that. Same with charters in general, to some degree (see, i.e. Two Rivers). There are some parents in DC who think they are escaping some horrible travesty by opting into these programs, but it's a house of cards. I'd send my kid to an IB Title 1 in DCPS any day of the week before sending them to MV8th or Stokes EE. But I have an older child and know the difference, and know to look beyond the kids in the PK classroom clapping along to a French counting song. People need to wise up.

My neighbor said the same to me when I chose MV8. Guess who is changing school now in third grade?

Hint: It is not me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're doing it because it's the best school they got into overall. Or, one parent handles the language stuff but that parent was not at the party.

Some people have more important things going on in their lives, like actual serious problems that are more important.

If you need all parents at your school to be motivated, you're going to be very unhappy in this school system.

This is it, plain and simple. The DC school lottery funnels kids into immersion schools because of push factors, meaning, DCI provides a more solid high school pathway than their IB school or other available DCPS options (that don't require a top 5% lottery draw in one particular year). Some parents don't care about the language at all, but just want that pathway. Others think any language exposure is beneficial, even if their kids never become fluent. Others believe they'll achieve fluency without having to put in any extra effort at home.

Compare with suburban schools that have solid IB options and attract immersion kids through pull factors. Meaning, they want IMMERSION with a longer bus ride more than they want their acceptable neighborhood school. Apples and oranges to DC.

This is sort of true. Some immersion schools absolutely draw in parents who are just looking for a solid school with a good base of invested, involved families and decent test scores.

But in recent years we've seen a proliferation of immersion programs where the school itself is fundamentally flawed, the academics are aggressively bad, and this quickly leads to shedding the families who are education-focused and involved. Take a look at Stokes EE (both languages) and Mundo Verde (especially Calle Ocho, but problems at both campuses). Parents wind up "pushed" to these schools because they assume the quality of education will be higher than it is a their IB or even at non-immersion charters. But these schools have massive problems and many kids aren't learning the language and also aren't learning, period. One factor hitting many immersion (and Montessori) schools is that the teacher shortage is more acute for them because they need teachers with language skills. Well there are less of those. And charters don't always pay teachers well and there's less job security and stability, so you may see a lot of midyear departures, something that is rare in DCPS.

So, sure, if you are getting into YY, LAMB, DCB, Oyster, Marie Reed immersion track -- you are likely getting what you hope. But immersion does not actually equal better academics. In DC, it can actually equal significantly worse academics, because schools can coast with clueless PK families who lottery in thinking they "won" because they got an immersion spot, and only start to wise up in 1st and 2nd when not only do almost none of the kids in class actually speak the language, but also the school's PARCC scores are eye-poppingly bad. And people commute across town for some of these schools!

Immersion has been viewed as a proxy for quality in DC for a while now and the truth is much more complicated than that. Same with charters in general, to some degree (see, i.e. Two Rivers). There are some parents in DC who think they are escaping some horrible travesty by opting into these programs, but it's a house of cards. I'd send my kid to an IB Title 1 in DCPS any day of the week before sending them to MV8th or Stokes EE. But I have an older child and know the difference, and know to look beyond the kids in the PK classroom clapping along to a French counting song. People need to wise up.