Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

26 comment(s)

Editor's Note: Prior to announcing the government's new French Second Language program, Education Minister Kelly Lamrock wrote down his reasons for calling for major changes to the system. Today and tomorrow, we are sharing the minister's statement.

When I was appointed Minister of Education, I knew I'd taken on a huge challenge. Our government had promised to do more than just manage the system.

We had promised to build the best education system in Canada --- one that would someday give our kids the ability to read, write, understand math and science, and to solve problems creatively as well as the children anywhere in the world.

We knew that to drastically change results would mean drastically changing the system. We promised ourselves that we would not avoid taking on issues that were hard or seen as untouchable. Change can't be about what makes adults feel comfortable --- it has to be about what helps all kids learn.

This has been a tough decision for our government. We've heard from lots of New Brunswickers, and we've heard lots of different opinions and experiences. I've learned from every single one of them, and I've shared what I heard with other Members of the Legislative Assembly.

We heard from parents who never had a chance to learn French delighted at hearing their Early Immersion student speaking French. We heard from parents, who believe that being bilingual is the best route to a job, or part of being a New Brunswicker, and don't want to risk losing the programs that have worked for the kids they know. We heard from parents who want to retain a choice in when or whether their kids learn French at all.

We also heard from parents who lived in communities that didn't have access to Early Immersion. We heard from parents whose kids struggled in Immersion and got lost in a Core French class filled with other kids who have struggled. We heard from parents who sang the praises of Late Immersion and Intensive French.

We also heard from teachers --- those who have taught Immersion well and have seen kids do well in their classes, and those who have felt the frustration of teaching classes where they couldn't do their best because of streaming. We heard from teachers who swear that they've never seen progress as rapid as Intensive French.

Anyone who listens to New Brunswickers will know that there's no magic consensus. There's no safe, easy answer. But, if we're to really change our system --- to go from being a province where kids don't read, write or do math as well as other Canadians, to one where they do it better than anyone else --- politicians will have to do more than wait until we discover some perfect safe place for us to land.

There have been many reports over the years on our French Second Language system. Some were reports on our entire education system that identified FSL as a major part of the structure that shapes results. Others were specifically on FSL or some aspect of it.

Certain things seemed to come through in all the reports. The desire to give kids the gift of learning a second language is becoming something more and more parents share. For those kids who enter Early Immersion and stay with it, the program works and works well. (Here's how well -- Department numbers suggest 85 per cent of early Immersion kids surpass Intermediate level --- the largest group at Advanced level, a level good enough for professional settings.)

And for those who enter Late Immersion, the program also works, and works well. (Here's how well -- Department numbers suggest 91 per cent of Late Immersion kids surpass Intermediate level -- the largest group at Intermediate Plus, one level below Early Immersion, but still good enough for most professional settings).

Yet for all these improvements, the number of kids graduating with bilingual capacity was stalled. And all the reports have some common reasons for that, too.

Core French hasn't worked. Kids don't retain anything hearing a language a few minutes a day. And so between 88 and 98 per cent of kids leave Grade 5 without even basic skills to string a sentence together.

Early Immersion only attracts a minority of students --- and it loses a number of them. I've heard experts disagree on exactly how many students drop out, but by the end of Grade 5 it's safe to say three-quarters of kids aren't in early Immersion.

Late Immersion has an attrition rate, too --- often due to the fact that high school students taking advanced courses may want depth in those courses beyond what they can do in a second language.

Of course, the children who drop out of Early Immersion in the first two years often do so because they struggle, and the adaptive resources aren't there to help them. The result is that one stream (Core French) has a hugely disproportionate share of children with Special education Plans (SEPs). If you put too many children who struggle in one class, none get the attention they deserve. Every report for years says we're doing just that.

Poor classroom composition isn't helping our standing in literacy, math and science. While this is a review of French Second language programs, no one program can be reviewed without looking at how it impacts other worthy goals.

So, there seem to be certain common themes that emerge.

Immersion programs work for teaching a second language. Programs that offer a little language at a time, like Core French, don't. Intensive French is showing progress at a speed similar to immersion, but hasn't been tried as much beyond Grade 5.

It's also true that far fewer than 70 per cent of kids are in immersion programs the way they are structured now, and that immersion programs don't retain kids well when they struggle. Streaming is real and the classroom composition that results creates some bad learning environments for kids.

What does all this mean?

It is non-negotiable that we want more students graduating with the gift of a second language. Bilingualism is good for an individual's job prospects. It helps our province attract jobs. It helps us meet each other and talk to each other and understand each other as New Brunswickers. And even if we never used the specific second language we learned, in a global economy it's a good thing for kids to have learned how to learn a second language. They'll be working in places and with people around the world as grownups.

So the goal of having 70 per cent of kids graduate with at least Intermediate skills is non-negotiable. That level lets them talk to people comfortably and conversationally, it serves them well in basic work situations, and ensures they can go even further if they choose as adults.

We also want a system that produces excellent results in literacy, math and science --- the foundational skills of learning. And we want our kids to be creative problem solvers, and exposed to art, music, and physical education. And we want all kids to have an equal chance to learn.

So, here's the challenge. If we were designing a system today, we would want a system that builds on what we know works in our immersion and intensive programs. We'd want programs that let kids hear and speak the language for a sustained period of time, and that get them actively speaking the language in every day settings, not just in a classroom environment.

If we were designing a system today, we would then want those experiences that make immersion work --- and we'd want them delivered in a way that doesn't limit those experiences to a minority of students. If we could, I believe we'd also want equal access to immersion programs and equal chances for kids to learn and get help when they struggle.

If all children could learn French in the same program, all kids could have access to what works now for a few. We could end the streaming that hurts our literacy rates. When a program works for a few, it can be scary for them to change it to share it with everyone. But it is the right thing to do. The question becomes: how can we keep what works about immersion, while sharing it with others?

Tomorrow: A Solution