Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Hate to brake it to you, but that standard represents an ideal that simply does not exist. I live in a Latino apartment building with immigrant families. The adults all speak Spanish. The kids still speak English. They may have been truly spanish dominant as infants and toddlers, but by preschool age, they're surprisingly English dom. I don't understand it myself, but it is what it is. Maybe Oyster should focus on attracting speakers with native fluency, regardless of how they achieved it. Clearly if some American family is resourceful enough that they're kids can pass a test checking for native fluency in Spanish, they bring something to the table- the ability to foster and support Spanish fluency. Isn't that the goal to begin with?

However, bilingual kids who come from Spanish speaking homes (even if they prefer to speak English) bring vocabulary and cultural references/experiences that bilingual children (from English speaking homes) simply do not have in their background. I would much rather have the bilingual child from a Spanish speaking home occupying those “Spanish dominant” seats, than a bilingual child from an English speaking home. My child will learn much more that way.

Anonymous wrote:^^ Hate to brake it to you, but that standard represents an ideal that simply does not exist. I live in a Latino apartment building with immigrant families. The adults all speak Spanish. The kids still speak English. They may have been truly spanish dominant as infants and toddlers, but by preschool age, they're surprisingly English dom. I don't understand it myself, but it is what it is. Maybe Oyster should focus on attracting speakers with native fluency, regardless of how they achieved it. Clearly if some American family is resourceful enough that they're kids can pass a test checking for native fluency in Spanish, they bring something to the table- the ability to foster and support Spanish fluency. Isn't that the goal to begin with?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: the SD rule at Oyster (google it—the definition for SD at Oyster does exist),

Is this the OA rule for Spanish dominant? It's what I found, and looks right.

"A child is considered "Spanish-dominant" if his or her native tongue is Spanish,
meaning that Spanish is the principal language spoken in the child's home and the child is
demonstrably more comfortable speaking Spanish than speaking any other language. In
addition, to be considered "Spanish-dominant" a child must demonstrate age-appropriate
language and linguistic development in Spanish.”

Anonymous wrote: the SD rule at Oyster (google it—the definition for SD at Oyster does exist),

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm also an outside observer with no stake in this, but I see an argument with the above: most of the non-Spanish kids start Oyster in K. Only a handful get in during pre-K, and there is no PS program. So at most you would be giving the English-dominant kids one year of full immersion, with a few possibly getting two.

That's a really good point. Tough situation, with the demographics moving against you.

Actually, quite a few of Oyster's IB English-dominant kids are bilingual (like my DC) from having attended a Spanish immersion preschool for years. So when my child arrived in K, she had already received 4 years of Spanish instruction/immersion. This fall’s PK class will have 25 Spanish-dom. kids (out of 35). Oyster’s three K classes usually total 75 kids (25/classroom). If you have 25 rising K Span-dom. kids (from the aforementioned PK class), plus 5 more added in K, then you have 30 Spanish-dom. kids out of 75 (that’s 40% Spanish-dom). Included in that 75 K class will be at least 10 kids like mine (bilingual, but they come from an English speaking home). So now, you have AT LEAST 40 Spanish-dom and bilingual kids—that’s 53% (better than 50/50) of the K class that speaks and understands the target language. If you make Oyster full immersion for PK and K, that should be all you need to tip the scales. Show me the will (on Oyster’s part), and I’ll show you the way.

My kid is already in so we’re fine either way. I just think that moving the school is a bad idea for Oyster. No other immersion school in DC (charter or DCPS) can touch Oyster’s test scores. That fact is not unrelated to the predominately affluent, well-educated IB (both English and Spanish dom.) families who send their well-prepared children to Oyster. If you eliminate that important (but often overlooked) ingredient, watch the test scores slide as well (to say nothing of the fundraising).

Good post. One question, how many of the 25 PK4 kids admitted in the Spanish lottery only (or predominantly) speak Spanish? I think that's a big part of it to, as some other posters alluded to. I think there are quite a few kids who would pass a Spanish language speaking test, but are still more comfortable speaking in English, so that's what they default to if they aren't forced to speak Spanish. I say that because the other day I noticed a fully bilingual parent I know, speaking totally in Spanish to their child, who understood everything and responded solely in English. This is a kid with one fully bilingual parent, and one parent who speaks pretty good English but probably speaks Spanish 90% of the time. If a kid like that speaks English to their English-only peers, those kids won't get the Spanish they need.

A lot of this is related to income levels, as you said. There are a number of truly bilingual adults in the OA area, who speak perfect English because of their educational background. Their kids get into the PK4 Spanish lottery, and are fluent in Spanish, but don't really speak it to their peers.

Not trying to advocate one way or the other (earlier outsider poster), just trying to understand the dynamics at play. From what I can see, it's really tough to match up an immersion model that relies on some control of admissions, with a "by right" neighborhood school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm also an outside observer with no stake in this, but I see an argument with the above: most of the non-Spanish kids start Oyster in K. Only a handful get in during pre-K, and there is no PS program. So at most you would be giving the English-dominant kids one year of full immersion, with a few possibly getting two.

That's a really good point. Tough situation, with the demographics moving against you.

Actually, quite a few of Oyster's IB English-dominant kids are bilingual (like my DC) from having attended a Spanish immersion preschool for years. So when my child arrived in K, she had already received 4 years of Spanish instruction/immersion. This fall’s PK class will have 25 Spanish-dom. kids (out of 35). Oyster’s three K classes usually total 75 kids (25/classroom). If you have 25 rising K Span-dom. kids (from the aforementioned PK class), plus 5 more added in K, then you have 30 Spanish-dom. kids out of 75 (that’s 40% Spanish-dom). Included in that 75 K class will be at least 10 kids like mine (bilingual, but they come from an English speaking home). So now, you have AT LEAST 40 Spanish-dom and bilingual kids—that’s 53% (better than 50/50) of the K class that speaks and understands the target language. If you make Oyster full immersion for PK and K, that should be all you need to tip the scales. Show me the will (on Oyster’s part), and I’ll show you the way.

My kid is already in so we’re fine either way. I just think that moving the school is a bad idea for Oyster. No other immersion school in DC (charter or DCPS) can touch Oyster’s test scores. That fact is not unrelated to the predominately affluent, well-educated IB (both English and Spanish dom.) families who send their well-prepared children to Oyster. If you eliminate that important (but often overlooked) ingredient, watch the test scores slide as well (to say nothing of the fundraising).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I'm also an outside observer with no stake in this, but I see an argument with the above: most of the non-Spanish kids start Oyster in K. Only a handful get in during pre-K, and there is no PS program. So at most you would be giving the English-dominant kids one year of full immersion, with a few possibly getting two.

That's a really good point. Tough situation, with the demographics moving against you.

Anonymous wrote: Why on earth would they jump to scrapping the longstanding neighborhood, language immersion school? I suspect because, as PPs have pointed out, the principal has ambitions and goals of her own.

Anonymous wrote:
I'm also an outside observer with no stake in this, but I see an argument with the above: most of the non-Spanish kids start Oyster in K. Only a handful get in during pre-K, and there is no PS program. So at most you would be giving the English-dominant kids one year of full immersion, with a few possibly getting two.

Anonymous wrote:As an outsider with no stake in the game (I have two of my children at WIS, and they will stay despite the crushing cost), I'm curious about parents' blanket acceptance that the 50/50 model is crucial. WIS is not 50/50 at all. There are 4 main languages of instruction (Spanish, French, or Dutch; and English for all), and although you will hear many languages on the playground, English is absolutely the main playground language, because it's the only language that all children know. Many children come in knowing none of the 4 academic languages because they speak one or more other languages at home, yet they all pick up both English and the other chosen academic language (oral and written) very quickly, and most are considered bilingual/biliterate in English and the other WIS language at some point during primary school.

So while I certainly understand why parents might WANT a 50/50 model for political and social reasons, is the research really unequivocal that it's the only good model academically? If so, many international and U.N. schools would seem to be doing it all wrong.


You are exactly right! The research says that at least 1/3 or more of the children/speakers must come from homes where the target language is spoken (Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL)). The ideal is 50/50, but the research acknowledges that this is rarely achieved. As a matter of fact, I don't believe that there is even one dual immersion school in DC that achieves this balance consistently throughout each grade. The key is full immersion in PK and K. How hard is this to implement if Mundo Verde did it in one year?!?
I am an IB parent who attended several meetings on this issue. This memo clearly reflects the admins/teacher’s desire to have one campus for their own convenience. If the intent was to do what is best for the students, then the admin. would focus on improving the school as a neighborhood school. How difficult is it to stop admitting kids who are OOB and come from English-speaking homes (admitted via the Span-dom. lottery thanks to their bilingual preschools)? How difficult is it to admit a larger percentage of truly Span-dom. kids via the PK lottery (this would help to balance the influx of mostly English speaking kids who enroll in K)? If Oyster need more kids who come from Span. speaking homes, why won’t someone go over to Mount Pleasant (about 1.5 miles away), and start handing out/posting flyers IN SPANISH inviting these families to apply for the lottery? Oh, I know why…that would make it more difficult for the principal to steal the school from Woodley Park and create her own (oops, I meant citywide magnet) school in ONE building. Can Monica just please leave and go start her bilingual charter in whatever neighborhood she chooses. We’re not giving Oyster up without a fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At the moment, DCPS handles the Oyster-Adams lottery. Oyster-Adams is a "school of right," which means that if you live within boundary, your kids enroll there no matter your language dominance. DCPS does not assign lottery numbers based on a balance of Spanish or English speakers.

Not correct at all. Lottery IS based on language dominace and the school already has this control. Puzzlingly, they choose to admit/allow about 20% English OOB kids (many as grandfathered siblings of people who move OOB), then complain about the language balance being too English in primary.

But that's only for PK4, right? There aren't really any lottery seats available in K and up, as far as I can tell, except for maybe 1 or 2 a year.

So they do have some control of PK4 admissions, and can direct Spanish speaking kids there, but very little after that.

No. Actually only about 35% of OA is in-boundary (http://profiles.dcps.dc.gov/oyster-adams+bilingual+school). This vairies a bit by grade - and is it's higher in younger grades and lower in older grades. OA runs two lotteries - one for Spanish speaking families and one for English speaking families. To maintain language ballance the lottery accepts almost exclusively Spanish speaking families (which make up 50% of the school population).