Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.

Library is a waste of time for kids who regularly go to the real library. It's like going to a library, but where check-out takes forever because there are 25 people in line at once and where the selection is far more limited. The school library could be open before school, during lunch and after school for monitored self-checkout; kids could use the special block to learn science or drama or whatever other special the school was forced to cut to pay for library.

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of strange comments based on nothing in this thread. FWIW MV and DCI use standardized testing to see if children are learning Spanish. They don’t need a double blind research study. Math is taught in Spanish and English (every other lesson) and science, history, literacy are taught in both languages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

DP but I guess you don't realize that most immersion schools in DC are no longer teaching math or science in the target language by upper elementary, specifically because if they did the kids would fall woefully behind in those subjects. Maybe some teach science but not math. Also LAMB is an outlier -- the vast majority of immersion programs in DC admit students in upper grades even with no language background. In fact for a time this was a recommended way to get a spot at DCI on DCUM -- just lottery into MV in 4th or 5th. Well wait, wouldn't that be horrible for your kid, people asked? No no, don't worry, it's really "immersion light" at that point and your kid won't have any problem.

This sounds apocryphal. At LAMB, I've never even heard of a kid not being able to speak. Children pick up languages very quickly.

And you think every school is LAMB? It's not. There are many kids at MV and Stokes (especially the EE campus which struggles to keep teachers and where many kids aren't getting much language support at home) who are not able to speak almost any Spanish at all by upper grades. And yes there are kids lotterying into these schools in 4th and 5th, specifically to get access to DCI, which means there are plenty of kids at DCI who aren't fluent in any language. My understanding is that DCB is more like LAMB but technically I do think they take kids in older grades (it's just they have better retention and thus have fewer lottery spots to give).

There is lots and lots of weak immersion in DC. Your experience at LAMB is the outlier. It is sad to me that you don't know this.

Sorry PP but you are clueless and obviously don’t have any kids in an immersion charter. It is a well known fact that MV is the school strongest in spanish. All subjects are taught in both english and spanish,

Yes they will take less than a handful of kids in the upper grades but if no spanish background, these kids are set up to fail. It’s a myth on DCUM that these kids will be fine. Ask me how I know. Reality is that the few kids coming in the upper grades do have spanish background and are coming from DCPS bilingual schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

DP but I guess you don't realize that most immersion schools in DC are no longer teaching math or science in the target language by upper elementary, specifically because if they did the kids would fall woefully behind in those subjects. Maybe some teach science but not math. Also LAMB is an outlier -- the vast majority of immersion programs in DC admit students in upper grades even with no language background. In fact for a time this was a recommended way to get a spot at DCI on DCUM -- just lottery into MV in 4th or 5th. Well wait, wouldn't that be horrible for your kid, people asked? No no, don't worry, it's really "immersion light" at that point and your kid won't have any problem.

This sounds apocryphal. At LAMB, I've never even heard of a kid not being able to speak. Children pick up languages very quickly.

And you think every school is LAMB? It's not. There are many kids at MV and Stokes (especially the EE campus which struggles to keep teachers and where many kids aren't getting much language support at home) who are not able to speak almost any Spanish at all by upper grades. And yes there are kids lotterying into these schools in 4th and 5th, specifically to get access to DCI, which means there are plenty of kids at DCI who aren't fluent in any language. My understanding is that DCB is more like LAMB but technically I do think they take kids in older grades (it's just they have better retention and thus have fewer lottery spots to give).

There is lots and lots of weak immersion in DC. Your experience at LAMB is the outlier. It is sad to me that you don't know this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

DP but I guess you don't realize that most immersion schools in DC are no longer teaching math or science in the target language by upper elementary, specifically because if they did the kids would fall woefully behind in those subjects. Maybe some teach science but not math. Also LAMB is an outlier -- the vast majority of immersion programs in DC admit students in upper grades even with no language background. In fact for a time this was a recommended way to get a spot at DCI on DCUM -- just lottery into MV in 4th or 5th. Well wait, wouldn't that be horrible for your kid, people asked? No no, don't worry, it's really "immersion light" at that point and your kid won't have any problem.

This sounds apocryphal. At LAMB, I've never even heard of a kid not being able to speak. Children pick up languages very quickly.

And you think every school is LAMB? It's not. There are many kids at MV and Stokes (especially the EE campus which struggles to keep teachers and where many kids aren't getting much language support at home) who are not able to speak almost any Spanish at all by upper grades. And yes there are kids lotterying into these schools in 4th and 5th, specifically to get access to DCI, which means there are plenty of kids at DCI who aren't fluent in any language. My understanding is that DCB is more like LAMB but technically I do think they take kids in older grades (it's just they have better retention and thus have fewer lottery spots to give).

There is lots and lots of weak immersion in DC. Your experience at LAMB is the outlier. It is sad to me that you don't know this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.

Library is a waste of time for kids who regularly go to the real library. It's like going to a library, but where check-out takes forever because there are 25 people in line at once and where the selection is far more limited. The school library could be open before school, during lunch and after school for monitored self-checkout; kids could use the special block to learn science or drama or whatever other special the school was forced to cut to pay for library.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

DP but I guess you don't realize that most immersion schools in DC are no longer teaching math or science in the target language by upper elementary, specifically because if they did the kids would fall woefully behind in those subjects. Maybe some teach science but not math. Also LAMB is an outlier -- the vast majority of immersion programs in DC admit students in upper grades even with no language background. In fact for a time this was a recommended way to get a spot at DCI on DCUM -- just lottery into MV in 4th or 5th. Well wait, wouldn't that be horrible for your kid, people asked? No no, don't worry, it's really "immersion light" at that point and your kid won't have any problem.

This sounds apocryphal. At LAMB, I've never even heard of a kid not being able to speak. Children pick up languages very quickly.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.

Library is a waste of time for kids who regularly go to the real library. It's like going to a library, but where check-out takes forever because there are 25 people in line at once and where the selection is far more limited. The school library could be open before school, during lunch and after school for monitored self-checkout; kids could use the special block to learn science or drama or whatever other special the school was forced to cut to pay for library.

Agreed. Also to the PP who loved library as a kid -- I did too, but my elementary school's library was 5x the size of my kid's DCPS library. Also our librarian 100% taught library research to older kids. Did you not learn about card catalogs and the dewey decimal system, and later how to use the computer database, to look up books on specific subjects? I did. That wouldn't even be possible in my kid's school library because there are simply not enough books for it to be meaningful. There are almost no non-fiction subject matter books because schools now deem them a waste of money (they become out of date too quickly and most of the info is better found from online resources).

Of the fiction books at my kid's school, it's really hard for her to find books that appeal to her because so many of the upper grade books are graphic novels. She doesn't hate graphic novels but would much rather read a prose book. Most of those that they have are series she's already read. So she just feels frustrated during library because her options are a book she's already read, sometimes multiple times, or a graphic novel that she's not particularly excited about. Or a book well below her reading level.

Whereas at the actual library this is never a problem. I'd be THRILLED if library class for them was less frequent but involved a trip to a real library. There is one literally 3 blocks from school.

I'm a little wary of arguing that school libraries should be done away with because they aren't meeting the needs of advanced readers and kids who are regular visitors to public libraries. I'm guessing these are in no way the majority in the DCPS population.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

DP but I guess you don't realize that most immersion schools in DC are no longer teaching math or science in the target language by upper elementary, specifically because if they did the kids would fall woefully behind in those subjects. Maybe some teach science but not math. Also LAMB is an outlier -- the vast majority of immersion programs in DC admit students in upper grades even with no language background. In fact for a time this was a recommended way to get a spot at DCI on DCUM -- just lottery into MV in 4th or 5th. Well wait, wouldn't that be horrible for your kid, people asked? No no, don't worry, it's really "immersion light" at that point and your kid won't have any problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.

Library is a waste of time for kids who regularly go to the real library. It's like going to a library, but where check-out takes forever because there are 25 people in line at once and where the selection is far more limited. The school library could be open before school, during lunch and after school for monitored self-checkout; kids could use the special block to learn science or drama or whatever other special the school was forced to cut to pay for library.

Agreed. Also to the PP who loved library as a kid -- I did too, but my elementary school's library was 5x the size of my kid's DCPS library. Also our librarian 100% taught library research to older kids. Did you not learn about card catalogs and the dewey decimal system, and later how to use the computer database, to look up books on specific subjects? I did. That wouldn't even be possible in my kid's school library because there are simply not enough books for it to be meaningful. There are almost no non-fiction subject matter books because schools now deem them a waste of money (they become out of date too quickly and most of the info is better found from online resources).

Of the fiction books at my kid's school, it's really hard for her to find books that appeal to her because so many of the upper grade books are graphic novels. She doesn't hate graphic novels but would much rather read a prose book. Most of those that they have are series she's already read. So she just feels frustrated during library because her options are a book she's already read, sometimes multiple times, or a graphic novel that she's not particularly excited about. Or a book well below her reading level.

Whereas at the actual library this is never a problem. I'd be THRILLED if library class for them was less frequent but involved a trip to a real library. There is one literally 3 blocks from school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

This is a little weird, and very ridiculous. If the kids in an immersion school don't speak the language fluently, then *nothing* works. They can't learn math. They can't learn science. They can't learn anything because the instruction at least half the time is in the foreign language. As you might guess, this leads to a huge, huge emphasis from the get-go on making sure everyone can speak. It's why schools like LAMB don't admit new students after preK. They don't want non-fluent kids messing up their system.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.

Library is a waste of time for kids who regularly go to the real library. It's like going to a library, but where check-out takes forever because there are 25 people in line at once and where the selection is far more limited. The school library could be open before school, during lunch and after school for monitored self-checkout; kids could use the special block to learn science or drama or whatever other special the school was forced to cut to pay for library.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Having a foreign language as a special is nothing like immersion. If you want your kid to be fluent, you need immersion and that's only available at charters.

Someone may have already debunked this but it’s not true that immersion is only available at charters. Chisholm (formerly Tyler) is DCPS Spanish immersion and I believe Oyster-Adams is, too.

But PP said fluent. Your kid is not going to be fluent with just elementary immersion. They need to continue the language thru middle school and high school. And it’s not just taking a foreign language like a traditional school but actually taking other subjects in the language too.

Oyster tracks to Adams but it’s such a small middle school with limited course offerings, EC, and clubs. Then after that it is a dead end.

So PP is correct that the only real path in this town to fluency is charter with the immersion charters to DCI. The only other path is WIS which is private and 50k plus a year

NP, and I’ve taught plenty of Oyster kids over the years. Most are pretty much fluent in Spanish.

This is true. I believe all 8th graders pass the AP exam.

Passing an AP exam just shows you are proficient. It doesn’t not mean you are fluent. Neither is just understanding.

Fluency is understanding, speaking, reading, and writing.

8th graders passing an AP exam is impressive and Adams measures language proficiency other ways. May students at Oyster Adams are native speakers.

This is an odd jumble.

I would absolutely expect native Spanish speakers to do well on the AP Spanish exam in 8th grade after years if Spanish immersion.

However, that is not terribly helpful for non-native Spanish speakers and not really an indication one way or another for how non-native speakers fare in immersion programs.

So it's actually hard to say whether 8th graders are oyster passing the AP exam is impressive or not -- I'd say it's not particularly impressive for National ve Spanish speakers but us impressive for non-native speakers but now I'm wondering what percent of Oyster 8th graders pass, what their scores are, and how results differ for native versus non-native speakers.

+1. This. As to the PP above, how exactly does Oyster measure proficiency? How does Oyster measure fluency? Where is the data to show this especially for non-native speaking kids?

Bingo! XX administrators tend to highlight this as a major accomplishment by comparing apples to oranges. The true measure of success would be to compare XX non-Hispanic students from households where Spanish is not spoken and no private tutoring is used with other non-Hispanic Spanish learners from households where Spanish is also not spoken and no private tutoring is in place.

Even worse for Hispanic students (and even for some non-Hispanic students), I have the sense that once they move to high school, they are at a disadvantage in English. The lack of academic rigor, justified in the name of being “bilingual,” eventually becomes evident, and only those with strong support at home are able to catch up. The rest are left behind.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually hate that all schools have to have library. We had to cut science to keep a full time librarian when the Council passed that (unfunded) requirement and our school favored Science.

+1, and it doesn't help that the Library/Media curriculum is poorly conceived to non-existent. It's not the fault of the teachers -- kids are generally in library for only about 40 minutes once a week. And they are doing so much other stuff during the week. It's not enough time to learn actual skills like doing library research. Usually it winds up just being a read aloud for younger kids and "go check out a book and read" for older kids.

Also most schools have poor library resources (both books and a space to put them in) and DCPS doesn't allocate enough money to it. This is one of the consequences of having smaller neighborhood schools, you can't really fund a strong in-house library at all these little schools all over the city.

Schools would do much better arranging for a once a month or once every two month field trip to the nearest DCPL, or where that is not possible, having someone from DCPL come periodically with a book cart and a lesson about library science, research, etc. DCPL is actually a phenomenal resource and it would be better for DCPS kids to learn how to use it well than to piddle around in these little underfunded school libraries once a week.

I disagree. As a kid, listening to the librarian read a story was one of the best parts of the week. So was getting a chance to check out a book I wanted to read and actually have a nice place to sit and read it. It was a break from the normal classroom work that I loved. Turning it into a library science research block would have taken all the fun out of learning to read.

This. Library is my kids' favorite special.