Government of New Brunswick

Department of Education

Home

Comments

Education Minister Kelly Lamrock wishes to thank all those who took time to submit comments.

Please note that we will only post submissions from people who have given us explicit consent to do so. We will not post the following:

Submissions received on-line that indicate "Not public" on the web form
Submissions sent direct by email, letter or fax which do not explicitly ask us to post their comments or which divulge personal information about third parties (in order to comply with the Protection of Personal Information Act)
Submissions that contain statements considered to be defamatory, libelous, hateful, or of a commercial nature.
Duplicate submissions

Please also note that because each submission must be reviewed in the context of the above, there will normally be a time lag of between 2-3 days between receiving a submission and posting it on the website.

As of 4:30 p.m. Friday, July 25, 2008, the French Second Language consultation has concluded. Any comments received after that time will not be posted, but will be brought to the Minister's attention.

Improving French Second Language Programming Within a Quality Education System(pdf)

Comments appear in the language received.

J'aimerais par la présente vous présenter mes commentaires face à la situation du programme d'immersion.

Ayant appris l'anglais à un âge assez avancé et ayant vécu beaucoup de difficulté dans cet apprentissage, je suis donc convaincue de l'importance de l'apprentissage d'une deuxième langue à un jeune âge.

De plus en plus de cultures encouragent l'apprentissage d'une deuxième langue à bas âge. Par exemple, dans la Corée du Sud, plusieurs instituts de langue offrent l'apprentissage de l'anglais à des enfants de 2 à 5 ans. Alors, pourquoi voulons-nous retarder cette opportunité à nos jeunes néo-brunswickois.

Il est vrai que nos jeunes qui sortent d'un programme d'immersion ne sont pas tout à fait bilingues et d'après moi, nous n'avons pu donner à ces jeunes la confiance à communiquer en français. Donc, il est essentiel d'apporter des changements face au programme d'immersion.

Par exemple, les enfants devraient être immersés complètement dans l'apprentissage d'une deuxième langue. Ce qui voudrait dire que tous les cours seraient donnés en français. Alors, la musique, l'art, l'éducation physique, l'histoire, la physique, etc. devraient aussi être enseignés en français. Trois paliers distincts d'éducation devraient exister, soit le système anglophone, francophone et celui d'immersion. Cela voudrait dire que partout dans la province, il y aurait des écoles d'immersion, francophones et anglophones et non des sections réservées à l'immersion dans une même école.

Dans ces écoles d'immersion, à partir de la maternelle jusqu'à la douzième année, tout serait enseigné en français. Ce qui distinguerait ces écoles d'une école francophone serait que la communication avec les parents se ferait en anglais. Évidemment, il faudrait changer la restructuration des zones scolaires, par exemple, Devon Elementary School serait une école anglophone et Barker's Point Elementary School deviendrait une école d'immersion. De cette façon on pourrait offrir plus de littératie et de spécialistes selon les besoins d'école.

Les étudiants du programme d'immersion devraient aussi être évalués régulièrement par vos spécialistes afin d'assurer du progrès de ceux-ci ou d'apporter selon le cas, des modifications au programme si ceux-ci ont plus de difficulté à atteindre les résultats souhaités.

Apprendre une deuxième langue n'est pas facile mais puisque nous avons la chance de vivre dans une province bilingue, faisons tous les efforts pour aider nos jeunes néo-brunswickois à vivre cette opportunité.

Merci de m'avoir permis d'apporter mes commentaires tout en espérant que le programme d'immersion précoce ne soit pas aboli.

I have been teaching in the Moncton area for 29 years, 23 of which have been as an Early French Immersion teacher. I feel that the significant explanation for the "streaming" problem has been a lack of support for children enrolled in Early Immersion who have difficulty in the early years. There is a long history of having NO French Immersion resource teachers and an early policy of transferring those in difficulty into the "English" classes. Even after this policy of transferring students was largely abolished and the decision left to parents entirely, the idea of having more help availble in the English classes continued and became an 'urban legend' among parents. In fact, my colleagues and I have usually encouraged children to stay in the program and then see the parents pull them out. Why not have special needs students in Early Immersion? Why not have anyone who wants to enroll graduate in Immersion? There are so many more 'urban legends' out there about how Immersion is not for special needs, how Immersion will bring down your average in high school, so you should drop it as soon as possible, etc. None of them are true or accurate. Where is the Department of Education in promoting it's most notable program? It is going to drop it because of these public myths. Should not the Department of Education base its decisions on reliable research?

Cannot we do more to promote the benefits for brain development as well as language development in learning a second language at a young age? Cannot we become more inclusive and erase the myth of elitism and exclusivity associated with Early French Immersion? It has been a program which is open to all, so why have some socio-economic segments of the population continued to avoid it? Why does it have the stigma of being elitist? Perhaps the publicity surrounding it for years has encouraged these attitudes. As far as streaming in the "English" classes is concerned, the plan of Intensive French for all in Grade 5, followed by a choice between English and Late Immersion will delay the streaming until grade 6, but it may become even more pronounced than it has been.

As a parent, I am proud of my two daughters who continue their studies in French Immersion. My oldest daughter will begin her bacalaureat at Universite de Moncton in the fall.

I will be retiring soon from my position in the public schools, but I am reviewing this controversy with utter dismay. I am relieved that my daughters have had the benefit of the Early Immersion program before its demise.

I am strongly opposed to Honourable Minister Lamrocks's recommendations on canceling the EFI Program. This letter further outlines my position and is divided into four sections Past, Present, Future and Ideas.

PAST

My parents, sisters and extended family are all English

I was the second group of Early Core Immersion Program in 1974. Attending Victoria & Edith Cavell School for 9 years in the immersion program.

My experiences in those first 9 years were fantastic. I was taught by teachers who cared enough to ensure we always had the best. We were provided materials for enrichment beyond the course structure. My only complaint about my first 9 years is the switch in Math due to lack of textbooks. Math was taught in the French language with the metric system for the first 3 years, in Grade 4 we were switched to Math in the English language in the Imperial system. The language was not the problem as much as the Imperial system seemed to cause confusion.

My teachers taught me to be proud of being a Canadian, proud to be a New Brunswicker, proud to be part of THE ONLY BILINGUAL PROVINCE IN CANADA. We were taught to respect each other and to listen with an open mind to all points of view before making a decision.

../2

Page 2

In Grade 10, I enrolled in Harrison Trimble High School to take BUSINESS. At that point in time there was still such a thing as a "Business Diploma". To obtain this certification, one was required to take a number of specific courses. Due to the number of specific courses required and the times they were available I was unable to continue my French language studies with the exception of HISTOIRE in Grade 10. If I could have taken more French courses I would have.

Per Honourable Minister Lamrock's criteria he would call me a "DROP OUT" - I find this OFFENSIVE!!!!! I did all that I could with the resources available.

My French speech, reading and comprehension are all very high. Admittedly my French writing skills are not what they could be - I rarely have the need/opportunity to write in French.

My chosen field is accounting. My French mother tongue clients prefer to have their financial affairs in the English language.

When I speak French to a francophone, I find them inquiring as to where I obtained my French language instruction. I often hear comments such as "You are proof the system works"

Present

My Daughter, Emma has just completed Grade 1 French Immersion. We were very fortunate that she was placed in a Split Class. By the end of this 1st year she is reading at a Grade 3 Level in French and is starting Grade 3 vocabulary. Her English skills are superior for her age. We have always encouraged reading. In kindergarten she was using Grade 2 materials to keep her from being bored. She was termed a "proficient English reader" in October of her kindergarten year. She continues to write/read/speak in both languages.

This program has certainly worked for my daughter and we are very proud of her and her accomplishments as well as our accomplishments as parents. My husband does not speak French but helps with Math, etc.

It is the parents' responsibility to teach our children. School is merely a tool we have at our disposal. I worked very hard with my daughter in her 1st term of EFI to ensure her accent was perfected to the best she could.

I will continue to work with my child throughout her school years and beyond.

/3

Page 3

Future

My son will commence Kindergarten this fall. He is reading books with three-letter words and is moving on to many four-letter words. My son is naturally curious about French since we (his Mum & Sister) speak it often. He is picking up bits and pieces. He can add four-digit numbers together and has a keen interest in Maps, Cars, etc.

My Goal is to have Eric enrolled in EFI for Grade 1, in the fall of 2009. I am certain he could benefit from this program.

Please do not deny my son the opportunity to learn!

Ideas for Implementation

Do not throw out Early French Immersion!!!

I do believe that children learn more easily in their earliest years. I believe that having the CHOICE to put your child in English, EFI or LFI will benefit our Province and our Country.

I do not believe the Croll-Lee report was ever meant to study EFI. I believe that using Intensive French as a pre-requisite to Late Immersion will be of benefit to those who wish to take LFI.

For those who wish to take EFI - Please enhance the program to include TA's where needed. I believe one of the reasons students are switching to the English Program is that there are presently little or no TA's available to work within the EFI Program. If a child needs enrichment or remedial help it is lacking.

For those in the English program, please allow for enrichment and remedial teaching to all students so that they can be the best the can be.

The bottom line ---We are a Bilingual Province-- it is time we start acting like one!

Its hard to know where to begin. I guess that we can start with saying that we are a bit more than frustrated. My husband is origanally from this province. When we were first married, we were working elsewhere, but decided that when we wanted to start a family to move here so that they could get the rich french opportunities that my husband new were available and had experienced. Now we are stuck! As my oldest will be entering grade one in the fall, this decision that came out of the blue for all parents, has really shook our household, and our desire to stay here. I keep reading in the papers the decline of graduates staying here, or people moving to places with more/better oppportunities...well one of the big advantages that this province boasted was bilingualism, and you have just taken that away!
I can understand that you feel that the program wasn't working, and wasn't creating students who could read and write in english or french, but I feel that the problem is in your total educational structure. Why do you have teachers teaching subjects that they are unqualified to teach? If a teacher has a degree in kineasology, then he/she is not qualifed to teach math. My degree is in music education and I wouldn't presume to have the abilities to teach science/math/woodworking. Being a good teacher is not just having the ability to teach. Its having indepth knowledge and passion for the subjects you are teaching!!!!! The high school outcomes cannot be blamed on the early immersion programs, if anything they are keeping your scores as high as they are now. What is to blame is the placement of teachers in subjects that they are not qualified for. Don't pull a program in which there have been extensive studies made that shows children absorb languages more fluently at an early age, this is the reason why the early immersion program was implemented in the first place. You may feel that it isn't working, but walk in to an immersion classroom, and I think that you will be amazed at the level of compentancy of the language.

I feel the decision wether or not to have our kids in early french immersion should have always been up to the parents to enroll there kids into whatever progams they deem exceptable for there children,,,and not be dictated to by the government as to what we should and should not do ,for the benefit of our own children,....i agree 100% with the decision to have early french immersion back in the hands of the families and not the government once again.

French immersion for grade one's has been available since the mid 1970's now it is going to be cancelled for no good reason across the province. Kids need to start french immersion in Grade one or earlier to be proficient later in life. Late french immersion is fine for low inrollment areas but where the demand is high and parents see the value there should be no change in the programs.

If only 25% of the population takes advantage of this program than so be it let the other 75% of the population stay in core french or core english.

If grade one french immersion changes they Kelly Lamerock wants it to go our family will not vote for the Liberals again. It is a disgrace that a great program is being threatened by poor information by a poor excuse for an education minister.

I believe the system needs a major overhaul but also feel areas other than FSL could be visited first. One glaring example is the need for Standardized Testing/teaching. My wife and I take great interest in our childrens development and while at a Parent/Teacher meeting in the fall I was informed that "the children are exactly where they need to be in Math", less then 10 days later after a Teacher Development Day a note was sent home stating concerns our children were very much behind and added Math work would be needed in order to catch up by year end. I have also noticed a difference in times and how topic instruction is given, some schools introduce multiplication of 2 numbers by 2 numbers far earlier then others for example, and yes I have visited the Curriculum on this website and realize that teachers shouldn't be handcuffed so to speak in there delivery but some form of tracking is needed.
Another problem I have with the present form of testing is the Grade 2 and Grade 5 benchmarks and nothing prior or in between. My son was tested in Math this past fall (grade 3) and did poorly as did much of the class, when I questioned the results I was informed this test was for work covered in grade 2 and he would not be tested again until grade 5. I also feel with such gaps in Standard Testing we will always over react to any poor results and eventually cause for a reduction in time spent on subjects that show good results. This system leaves to much to chance and if one teacher has strong skills or feels a greater importance to one subject then another this will definitely be reflected in the student outcomes.

As a graduate of EFI, my ability to speak, read and write in French continues to be a huge benefit. Not only do I use my second language every day at work but I have had the opportunity to use French in many of the countries I have visited over the years. Knowing a second language has been a springboard to my learning other languages. I strongly believe that I would not have decided to stay in New Brunswick had I not been a graduate of EFI because it would have been too difficult to find good employment.

As a parent of a child preparing to start school in September, I am saddened that he may not have the opportunity to experience EFI. We are currently a multilingual family and our children will continue to learn languages but I am disappointed that we may not have the support of the education system behind us until grade five. My brother was a graduate of the Middle (grade 4) FI program and he cannot speak French. He has also left the province to find work elsewhere.

I would like to see EFI begin at the earliest stage, in kindergarten, where children can benefit from the program the most. Lets face it, job descriptions in NB will not change and if we take away NB children's opportunity to learn a second language at a young age, we shut doors for them. If we are to become self sufficient, children should be learning both official languages from the youngest age.

Before I get to my comments, questions and suggestions regarding the proposed changes to the education system, I would like to state that although I have a positive attitude towards the Intensive French Program and thinks it's a good alternative to the existing Core French Program, I do not think that the complete elimination of the Early French Immersion program is the right approach.

I attended the Open House at Rothesay High School (District 6) on June 25, 2008. I thought it was very well organized and had most of the information that I wanted to see 4-6 months ago. I was very disappointed in the government's original approach to making drastic changes to the education system. From the first time I heard rumors about the Intensive French program, I had a very positive view on the program as an alternative to the existing CORE French program. I think it's a new and potentially successful program that will increase the level of bilingualism and will hopefully improve the attitude towards French as a second language in the province. Unfortunately, the government's complete lack of communication and "openness" of informing the public of the proposed changes has soured the whole program and its purpose. We live in a democratic society and good or bad, there is a process that must be followed before changes to any system can be made. No one should be above this process, even if they think that the end result will benefit the majority of residents. While a couple of years of review might be too long, 6 weeks is too short for a change of this magnitude. The government should seriously consider delaying the decision for 1 year and allow the students who had already registered in the EFI program to enter in Grade 1 in the fall of 2008. If the government is so sure that the changes are the right thing to do for our children then they should be (and should always have been) completely open to the public and allow us the opportunity to express our concerns

(FROM DISCUSSION PAPER: Given the above, what programs do we need in New Brunswick to give all kids an opportunity to acquire strong French second-language skills?)

COMMENTS: From the quoted statistics, it is apparent that the Core French Program is not working. A form of the intensive French Program is a great idea for children who would otherwise follow the Core program all the way through K-12. There are many issues with the Intensive French system and it still needs improvements before it should be implemented province wide.
QUESTIONS: Where are the test results of those children who have gone through the Intensive French Program and subsequent Post Intensive French Program? Was there an increase in the number of students to register for the Late Immersion Program? What were the parent's responses? It was nice to see of video of the "Happy Parents", however I'm sure not all of the comments where positive. What were some of the concerns and what does the government plan to do to improve the program? For example, without being directly involved in the program, I heard several negative comments from concerned parents whose children went through the program this past year. Here are two:
1) Their children did not do homework for the entire 5 month intensive French period and were hard to motivate during the second half of the year when they had to return to a "normal" homework schedule.
2) There were no reading requirements during the 5 month intensive French period. Won't this affect there reading skills?
SUGGESTION1: Early French Immersion is definitely a successful program. Based on the above statistics, almost have of the students are at an advanced level. It would be interesting to see how many are at the Intermediate Plus level. The government should not cut a successful program. Encourage more kids to give it a try. Have a good transition plan for those who have difficulty with the program or with other basic skills in the early years (K-1) and then offer the children the Intensive French Program after they've had a chance to work on their basic skills.
SUGGESTION2: Offer some form of French training from K-4 before children enter the Intensive French Program in Grade 5. Make it part of the music, art and physical education component. The earlier children are exposed to a second language to easier it is for them to absorb it. The older children get, they have to spend more time "learning" the language as oppose to absorbing it.

(FROM THE DISCUSSION PAPER: How do we turn things around, and give all kids an equal opportunity to learn and achieve in all subjects, especially the fundamental areas of English, math and science? In New Brunswick's inclusive environment, how do we address streaming and class composition issues?)

QUESTION: No matter how many times I ask this question, I have not received an acceptable answer. How does eliminating the EFI program, help struggling students with Math, English and Science. The children in EFI do not have a problem so they will continue to do well. The children who have difficulty, specifically those on SEPs, will still have difficulty learning. So who will benefit from combining the two groups of children? I did ask this question at the Open House and was told by a District employee that they did not know the answer and that they had been asking the same question.
COMMENTS: The government has been throwing around the "streaming" term and the only reason I can think is to cause anger towards children in the EFI program. This is a ridiculous issue. No one can argue that EFI program leads to separation between different levels of students. However, each parent has, or had, the choice to enroll their children in this program. The education encourages "streaming" through Grade 12. Unless I'm mistaken, High School classes are divided into different levels as well (1, 2, 3). Are we going to get rid of these as well?
SUGGESTION: Keep the successful EFI program in place for those students who are achieving success. Put more resources into improving the Fundamental Areas (I'm referring to non-French subjects such as English, math and science).

(FROM THE DISCUSSION PAPER: What kind of system can we put in place, in a fiscally responsible and sustainable way, that builds on existing strengths, helps all kids become bilingual, produces excellent results in English, math and science, and exposes our children to art, music and physical education?)

SUGGESTION: Keep the EFI program for interested and able children. Offer some exposure of the French language during the enrichment subjects (music, art and physical education) for those kids enrolled in the Core program. Combine the EFI and CORE children during the enrichment subjects.
COMMENTS: EFI is a better program than the proposed Intensive French Program with respect to level of bilingualism. Do not cut the successful program with one whose first trial students have barely reached Grade 12. If this is the right program for everyone, the results will show in a few years.

BOTTOM LINE:
Explore Intensive French Program with a few possible improvements such as earlier entry point.
KEEP Early French Immersion Program

Thank you for your time and I do hope that you take the much needed time to review these comments and seriously reconsider the proposed changes. Do what's best for all children in the province and this includes those who have the potential to be high achievers. Let's give all of the children the best opportunity to learn.

As a parent of French school kids I'm concerned that my kids who are enrolled in the French school system will be adversly affected by this decision.

French schools run a risk of being swamped by requests of parents who would have enrolled their kids in the EFI program if it still existed.

My concern is that the French environment that I want my kids to benefit from will become dilluted by this inflow of kids who's mother tongue is English and who will likely gravitate to the English language outside the classrooms and in the school yards.

It's already hard enough to raise kids in French in many areas of New Brunswick, we shouldn't be lowering the quality of the French school system by making those instutions Second Language Teaching institutions.

I'll start by saying that I have 3 children they range in age 7 to 22 yrs, and it has been said over and over again New Brunswick children score low,I don't believe this. One child did core french, one child did english, and one just started grade one french immersion. The results over the years with our variety in schooling has been all can succeed, but, our immersion child has amazed us in that he can read fluently in french and english, he scored high in math, he spells quite well, if anything can be improved upon it would be printing.

Out of our three children one struggled, one did quite well, and the last is doing great! but what a difference learning early has made. We make an extra effort at home, I don't believe my child is smarter than anyone else', we had a choice and chose to do EFI, and are very glad we did.

We are a bilingual province, if my child can have a conversation with a french speaking person someday well then it was all worth it, maybe it will open a door for him sometime in the future, at school or work.
I don't have anything negative to say about EFI, it's all been positive for us.

Minister Lamrock

I am troubled by an event, described below, involving the Sussex Town Council responding to a well organized and highly vocal minority group representing one side of the present EFI debate. This event emphasizes how important it is for those who support Kelly Lamrock in his efforts to eliminate the deplorable effects of streaming and improve the educational system for the majority of students, to participate and make their views known.

On June 26, 2008, a headline appeared in the Telegraph Journal, noting that "Sussex Councillors Vote Unanimously to Delay Early French Immersion Decision". This seemed to many of us to be an unusual step for the members of a town council to take. Normally, the delivery of specific subject matter in the local schools is not considered to be the "province" of a town council.

The body of the article demonstrated a very different focus to that implied by the headline. To quote from the article, "Lila Johnson, parent and treasurer for the Canadian Parents for French, asked council for a formal resolution to support the maintenance of the early French Immersion program". Council listened to her request, but felt they "were not qualified enough to position themselves with local parents and their attempts to quash the education minister's plan of cancelling early French Immersion".

Two councillors and the Deputy Mayor were quoted as having opinions, and as this website is an appropriate place for their opinions and suggestions to be aired, their words, as reported in the Telegraph, are quoted below:

"It's really a provincial issue", said Councillor Tim Wilson., who pointed out he is not an educator and therefore didn't feel "qualified" like the minister, deputy minister and other staff to make decisions on educational programming. "It's very difficult for me on an issue such as this ...to render a decision." He said while he believes in a "well-grounded" education system and considers second language a "tremendous advantage to any child," he takes no position with the minister "doing some modifications."

"Deputy Mayor Marc Thorne hopes a fair and honest consultation process can take place with "no pre-determined positions" on the part of the government. He said he also wasn't qualified, however, to make a statement against Lamrock's plan for French programming in the province."

"Councillor Gary Fulton believes students and Sussex will suffer without early French Immersion and no French instruction whatsoever for students until Grade 5."

"Some (councillors) said it is difficult for a municipality to tackle a senior level of government over a decision that is their prerogative."

Following this discussion at the council meeting, in which the personal views of those quoted were made both clear and public, the council did not give the "formal resolution to support the maintenance of the early French Immersion program", which was requested by Lila Johnson, parent and treasurer for the Canadian Parents for French. Instead, citing both their lack of qualification and mandate to grant that, the council voted only to "delay the cut's implementation". The reason? Because, in the words of the Telegraph Journal reporter, "That is as far as council was comfortable going in its support of the provincial chapter of the Canadian Parents for French based in Sussex".

I think it is important that this "support" claimed by the Parents for French is evaluated by examining the manner in which it was obtained, and the appropriateness of seeking endorsement for one side of an issue, from a council which is neither qualified nor mandated to make such a judgement. Also, as the "headline" gives a far different impression of the council's intentions than was actually the case, it is necessary to read the individual comments of the councillors as published. Their words do not translate into support for the retention of EFI as was requested by Ms Johnson.

Clearly, this small incident illustrates the need for those of us who do not belong to a highly organized and vocal minority group, to speak out. If you see a need for changes in the current education program, now is the time to step up, speak out, and support the efforts of the Education Minister, Kelly Lamrock.

Mr. Lamrock

Today is June27th and is the last day of school for children in most other provinces. Why, with all the missed time to snow days days as well personal developement days for the teachers, do you feel the need to start summer break one week earlier.
I think that if this time were added up and multiplied by the thirteen years the kids spend in school you might come uo with the year of education are top preformers are lacking.

Mr. Lamrock,

First of all I like to say that I am not originally from New Brunswick. Having the Early French Immersion program available was the main reason we elected to stay and allow our children to attend public school in New Brunswick. Cancellation would mean we would relocate to one the other provinces you refer to as "successful". We also realize that even though our children are attending, what you refer to, as an "elite" program they are still "one full year of instruction behind the top-performers in the most successful provinces".
Do they offer Early French Immersion in these "successful provinces"?
Maybe we could try to copy what the "successful provinces" do and make New Brunswick a successful province as well.
In the meanwhile canceling your most successful program seems reckless. What has bothered us most is a seeming inability to foresee even the most obvious of effects your decision is and will have, let alone the less obvious.
For example, we had been trying to convince two families to relocate to Moncton from Nova Scotia. The first family wants their children to start in the Early French Immersion program (preferably in kindergarten as in Nova Scotia). The second family has children already in the English school system and doesn't want them to lose grade five to French. Now neither family will relocate (thanks).
If money were the main issue would it not be more economical to combine the French and English school systems and make them truly bilingual. The expense and pollution caused every day by the parade of buses would be saved. Children would know the kids who live beside them and the monies saved could be put into resources and training for the teachers.

I am writing this letter to let you know I agree with Mr Lamrock's decision on cutting Early French Immersion. I truly believe that all children should have equal leaning programs offered to them no matter were they live or what school they attend. Children should not have to travel many hours on the bus to get to the city so that they can learn the second language. Students need this second language if they are to stay in New Brunswick when they graduate.So why do the larger schools get the programs?? As well all children that are french and living in New Brunswick should have to learn English -that is are mother tongue here in New Brunswick.
My oldest child graduated last year and she does not have french due to her own choice by not wanting to travel 2 hrs on the school bus. She wanted to stay in her own community and go to school there .Now, where does that leave her. Working "outside New Brunswick". All government jobs that are offered here require both languages. She is taking nursing.I feel what a loss for New Brunswick having a nursing student leave the province due to not speaking a second language and I do mean "second language" How is that fair!!.English is our first language. French classes were only offer to her every other year at her school only if the majority of the students wanted to do that class.If there were not enough students that year for that class then french was not offered to anyone.
My youngest child will be going into Grade 5 this September and I am really excited for this. She will have 5 months of French and 5 months of English. Then french will be carried out right up to grade 12 in them having 2 hours of french -3 days per week. At the grade 12 level she will have the opportunity to write the Provinical French test. Yea, finally our small school will now be equal as far as language programs go, and hopefully Mr. Lamrock will make other choices so that our school will be equal to all programs that the bigger schools have. This is a step in the right direction.
Hats off too The Minister Of Education- he is thinking of all children in his province in making them all equal. Job well done. Please don't back down to them.You are doing a great job.

My first comment is that Kelly Lamrock is right to eliminate early immersion. Anyone with a fiscal mind can see the cost effective analysis implications. How many million dollars spent for less than 20% of our kids? Ridiculous. BUT my daughter is going into grade 4, facing major deficits due to a variety of issues, some of which are resolving with time and development. No one can definitivley tell me what her abilities are as she is difficult to assess, largely due to her hearing loss issues. Now, I have refused modified curriculum, having seen how Elementary assessment criteria are not developmentally appropriate, particularly for a child like mine with such learning obstacles and who started school at four years of age. They score her, for example, as experiencing difficulty with speaking and listening, year after year, in spite of the fact her speech has progressed more than any other child in her classroom in any given year, and she has had speech language input since the age of three. A hearing impaired child who experiences difficulty listening. Go figure. Where is the logic in that determination? They have a measuring stick of progress that they insist on applying to every child, with no real idea of the difference between testing and asessing. This leads me to my next comment: ELIMINATE THE OPTION TO START SCHOOL EARLY. IF YOUR CHILD'S BIRTHDAY IS BEFORE THE END OF JULY, THEN ALLOW THEM TO ENROLL THAT YEAR. IF NOT, ELIMINATE THE OPTION. I think you will save bundles in TA time and other costs and considerations, while these young children struggle to catch up with older peers, some of whom are a whole year older. I believe Alberta eliminated this option. Check it out. Bet it has saved the education system bundles. Those six months that are so notable a difference between six months of age and twelve months of age do not disappear when they turn four or five.

Lastly, my daughter struggles to read in English. She struggles to do math. It is absolutely irrelevant to me if she EVER learns to speak French. It is like giving her a Lexus when she cannot ride a trike. She needs the fundamental reading, writing and arithmetic. I should not have to pursue homeschooling or private school to prevent her from missing five months of very important fundamentals because someone seems to think a bilingual province means we all have to speak French. We don't. It is a world were English is the universal language, and Spanish (for example) is the language she would need to do well in the US. French (any language) is a wonderful asset, but not a necessity.I know I am branded as prejudiced to express something many people think but dare not say. So label me a biased person, but my daughter will too much of the basics during those five months> And do not think for one minute I will be forced to do French homework nightly. It will not happen. I refuse. Dismiss me, if you will, as an illiterate, but I hold two University degrees, one with first class Honours- I am not stupid. But I am a government employee, who has seen significant discrimination toward the anglophones in the civil service for years. Now, it appears, it is permeating our education system too. At this time, though her grade five year will be 2009-2010, I sincerely doubt I will leave her in our school system for that year. And it is wrong to force me to choose. And don't tell me modify her curriculum. You find me someone qualified to accurately assess a hearing impaired child, and I may accept a determination that modification is necessary AT THIS TIME. I may well agree to modification when she leaves the Elementary years, I will see how she continues to progress. Because our school has given her phenomenal assistance in literacy and math. She is doing well, considering the many obstacles she has faced in her short eight years. But what impact will the loss of five months have on her overall academic success? I have no doubt your proposed changes will not be to her advantage.

As a naturalized Canadian I strongly believe in benefits of learning foreign languages. It is possible to learn another language at any point of person's life but easiness, effort and effects very much depend on the age. Otherwords, the earlier the better. True bilingualism is born in one's childhood. I very strongly oppose the elimination of EFI. Late French Immersion will create very strong streaming since only ambitious and academically inclined children will opt for it. As in EFI, streaming is at the parents level and, therefore, can be influenced. The NB government should educate parents about benefits of EFI while providing necessary resources. Poor scoring of NB children is caused by the faulty education approach and not, by EFI. Children very easily transfer their learning skills from French to English, if provided with the right tools.

Based on the FACTS that NB is basically last in education, the idea of pushing mandatory French to a higher grade is the only thing that can be done. Allowing the English to be grasped first is quite important. Then teaching French at a later age would benefit the child more and make him/her a more literate individual.
I commend you on taking this on and standing your ground. I ask that you please do not give into the pressure and change you mind.
Sincerely,

I am in total agreement with Minister Lamrock's decision to revamp the FSL program in the New Brunswick school curriculum. I believe the decision to implement the grade 5 Intensive French Program should remain in place

Hello I'm french but will do this in English.
My son is English so is my wife but hoped that french immersion would help my son to learn french.
You call this a proposed improvements but in my opinion this is a tragedy for New-Brunswick.
All i want to know is who will be accountable if your plan doesn't work.
I cant support something that did not show clear result for my son .
You are playing with our kids future with no prove that your plan will work.
I'm not very happy with this an will show it at the next election.
At least you could have offered one class a day of french for those that want an early start but no, you just want to do what you want an don't care about the people of New Brunswick. I'm taking the time to write this in your language hope you will take the time to read it.
Good luck with screwing this province.

I have read 19 pages of comments on this website and there is still no proof that there is a "silent majority" out there. Yes, there are some who support Mr. Lamrock's idea of scrapping EFI but nothing remotely close to the MAJORITY.

Wow, how things change in one year! Here is what Mr. Lamrock said just last year:

N.B. public school language instruction just fine: Lamrock Last Updated: Monday, May 7, 2007 | 7:44 PM AT CBC News

New Brunswick has unique educational challenges that can only be met with the current dual French and English public school systems, Education Minister Kelly Lamrock said.

Kelly was responding to comments made over the weekend by Justin Trudeau, who told a meeting of elementary school teachers in Saint John that the province should scrap its two systems in favour of one, more cost-effective system for everyone.

Lamrock said he was surprised by the comments from Trudeau, the son of former prime minister Pierre Trudeau who recently entered politics as a candidate for the federal Liberals.

New Brunswick's unique challenges can only be addressed by two school systems, Lamrock said.

For instance in Tracadie, where there is a lot of French on the street and French at home, students there would take intensive English early on, Lamrock said.

"In other anglophone urban centres, it's important to make sure that francophone students . have one place in the school that can focus on French language and French culture and build that foundation."

New Brunswick's education system is working just fine, Lamrock said, and other provinces could learn from it.

As a parent of 4 children, I want them to have the best education they can. I have a son who is in the program now entering grade 6 and doing very well. I have a daughter who is entering grade 1 and I would like for her and my other children to have the same opportunities as he has.

I feel they can improve the program by giving resources and having people there to help out as they do for the english students. I feel the program should continue as this is a bilingual province.
I feel more things should be thought about like our teachers that go to school and become french teachers where does it leave them if there is not french to teach.
I do feel that it is very important for us to allow our children the best education possible and by taking the early french immersion away is just not going to happen.
Thank you for your time.
Miramichi, N.B

After attending the District 2 Open House, I have some additional thoughts. This is my second letter to your office; please do not throw it out.

Realizing that the status quo is more than likely not an alternative I have some suggestions.

1. Continuing with the implementation of the Intensive French but ONLY for those who intend on going into Late Immersion. Offer TA's as required to help students with the conversion process from French to English.

2. Offer the additional Phys Ed, Music, Art, etc.. to all elementary grades.

3. Offer TA's to the EFI program thereby allowing those struggling slightly to be more inclined to stay within the program. For Example if a child is struggling in Math - there should be help given regardless of the language. The alternative should not be they have to slide out into the English Program to get help.

4. Retrain any and all TA's, Teachers to be able to work with both EFI, IF, LFI and English classes.

5. Ask for more community volunteerism to work with students. i.e. Seniors clubs to help with basic reading, math, etc.. You may be surprised at who answers the call!!!

6. Keep EFI for all those who are interested in this program. Have parents more involved in the curriculum - become a partnership in raising these children.

7. STREAMING IS ALL IN ONE'S MIND. At West Riverview Elementary School, all the children participate in Multi-age days, FunFairs, Art Appreciation Nights, etc.. that incorporate all the classes together. They also offer Chess, Drama, and other Physical and Social groups at Noon & after-school to encourage all children to play together. The children do not judge each other. If the Parents do - that is quite honestly --the parent's issue.

8. Perhaps match some Grade 2 or 3 EFI students with some Intensive French children as they progress through the program to help mentor each other.

In Conclusion, I still feel giving the parents the ability to make informed decision on their children's schooling should out weight any economic downsides the gov't may perceive.

Since the majority of the experts agree learning something new at the earliest age gives the beast outcome; it seems silly to toss out EFI.

Money is an unfortunate necessity to make programs work. perhaps we should concentrate on ways to shift the budget monies around to keep the EFI program as well as start some new programs.

Our Children are our future - A future filled with dreams and ambitions. We should strive to be the BEST not mediocre.

Thanking you again for taking the time to read my additional thoughts.

Rather than provide complaints on this website, I will offer suggestions, as Minister Lamrock states he would like to receive from the public.
Please review UNB's Dr. Dicks' Alternate Plan to FSL. It is based on thorough research.
Also, pls. refer to experts in your decision (Dr. Dicks, Paula Kristmanson, Dr. Fred Genessee).
I strongly support EFI.

Mr. Lamrock,

I am not a language expert, nor were Mr. Croll and Ms. Lee. To me, what is strange is that so few second language experts seem to have been officially involved in this debate.

Personally, I would not be able to recommand a particular course of action regarding French immersion. However, looking at the few statistics I have seen, what is clear is that EFI is the only program that brought students to a level of French proficiency coherent with the goal of having more bilingual children out of K-12.

Words like "elitist" and even "segregation" (by Mr. Willms) have been used to qualify EFI. Segregation is a particularly strong word and I object to its use here, as I do for "elitist". Those two terms imply that there is a select group of kids allowed to enroll in EFI, while others are denied access to this program. This is simply not the case. The truth is that few parents chose EFI. For those who did choose EFI for their children, the results are indeed better than for Core French and LFI. That more children with special needs ended up in the other programs is not a matter of segregation or elitism: they would have been welcomed in EFI like everybody else. Rather, it is a matter of choice on the part of their parents, who are free to choose the path they deem most appropriate for them. Let us remember that the presence of high numbers of kids with special needs in regular classrooms is a consequence of inclusion, which is a totally different issue than immersion.

Consulting the public is a very important step in the democratic process, but I think what is missing is neutral and reliable, scientific information. Everybody has an opinion: parents, teachers, politicians, and so on, but who has facts? As was clearly demonstrated, the Croll & Lee report doesn't qualify as hard, scientific evidence. Now, why a task force of experts has not yet been formed and consulted to analyse this very important issue is beyond me.

So what I suggest is this: as demanded by the ombudsman, the Department of Education should postpone any changes in French immersion programs for a year. It should appoint a task force of experts in language education, not directly involved in this debate so far (thus ensuring objectivity), to provide the stakeholders with the state of scientific knowledge on the topic (as published in peer-reviewed journals) and recommandations. This task force should also include research methods specialists to assess the validity of the reviewed research and financial experts to assess the feasability of any proposed reform.

Then, I think, people should feel capable of making that important choice. Anything else, based on a heated confrontation of opinions and anecdotal "evidence", would be irresponsible. Let's face it: language education is not a field everybody is an expert in. I know I am not and I think certain politicians should admit it too. Making decisions based on an incomplete or distorted knowledge of the facts is unfit of an enlightened leader.

I hope this consultation is not just a way to comply with the court decision while the outcome remains the same.