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.

Dear Minister Lamrock:

Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on this important topic.

My very first recommendation is one that you have already rejected publicly on more than one occasion; however, I wish to state it nonetheless. I would suggest that changes to French Second Language education in New Brunswick should be delayed until the 2009-2010 school year. I respect your opinion that we cannot afford to wait another year to fix a system that is broken. However, such a drastic overhaul to the system should not be made without sufficient time being allowed for full discussion of alternative plans and for carefully working out the details of implementing the plan that is ultimately chosen. Your recent meetings with various stakeholders are an excellent step, but I sincerely believe that more time is needed to discuss different models with these individuals, to ensure that the best possible system is chosen and properly implemented.

However, given that it seems clear that you intend to proceed with changes that will take effect in the 2008-2009 school year, I will offer my thoughts.

Two of the major objectives stated in your discussion paper are the goal to have "70 percent of our kids able to function effectively when speaking their second official language" and the goal to "address streaming and class composition issues." Another goal that is not part of your plan, but that I believe is essential to New Brunswick as a uniquely bilingual province, is the goal to provide a realistic opportunity for as many students as possible to achieve the Advanced level of French proficiency.

While I recognize that many of the ideas below are similar to those discussed in the plan authored by Joseph Dicks and Paula Kristmanson, "An Alternative Plan for FSL in New Brunswick," I have expanded on a few specific points and have attempted to avoid unnecessary repetition of the main arguments offered by Drs. Dicks and Kristmanson.

Early French Immersion:

- I believe that Early French Immersion (EFI) should be retained and that major steps should be taken to make it a more inclusive program, as recommended by several recent reports on French language programming in New Brunswick. It has been well recognized that one of the primary reasons for students leaving EFI during the early grades is the fact that adequate support is not available for students who are struggling in the program. Rather than simply shunting these students to the "easier" Core program, we should give them the help they need to succeed and thrive in Immersion. Naturally, more bilingual Methods & Resources specialists are needed. Minister Lamrock, you have expressed concerns that appropriately trained individuals are simply not available; however, the proposal by Drs. Dicks and Kristmanson includes excellent suggestions for short-term and long-term plans for working with post-secondary institutions to ensure that teachers are trained with these essential skills.

- I also support the idea of beginning EFI in Kindergarten, although I do wonder if it might be wise to offer a Kindergarten curriculum that is closer to a 50-50 split between instruction in French and in English.

- An essential part of addressing streaming in the early years (if EFI is indeed retained) is for the Department of Education to provide parents of pre-Kindergarten students with more detailed information about both Early French Immersion and the regular English program: their objectives and the benefits and challenges of each. It must be made clear to parents that proper support *will* be available for students in both programs (and for their parents, particularly for those who have children in EFI and are not themselves functional French speakers). This information should also include a document that attempts to dispel the many misconceptions that New Brunswickers currently have about the Early French Immersion program, as well as a clear statement that there is absolutely nothing second-class about the non-Immersion program. Throughout the debate that has been taking place over the last few months, I have been genuinely shocked by the number of anecdotes I have heard about parents choosing Early French Immersion for reasons aside from the benefits of the program itself: e.g., to keep their children away from the "bad kids" or from students with learning disabilities. While I suspect that these stories might have been "played up" to a certain extent, it certainly does seem to be a prevalent issue. If we can change parental attitudes so that parents are choosing a path for their children based on the true benefits of the respective programs, then we will see a legitimate transformation in class composition. However, this cannot be done without sufficient resources being allocated to Immersion classrooms and without parents being properly informed by the Department of Education.

- I am also intrigued by the idea of "blended immersion" that has apparently been discussed at the recent stakeholders' meetings. I have not had the opportunity to hear a detailed description of this program, but the general idea of having Immersion students and non-Immersion students in the same classroom for certain subjects, is one that I hope you are strongly considering.

- One of the true inequities of the current system is the fact that Early Immersion is often not available in rural areas. I am not in a position to know how this is currently being addressed, but I would like to see significant efforts devoted to attempting to increase the availability of Immersion in these areas. Among other things, this should involve informing parents in rural areas fully about the benefits of Immersion and about the fact that such a program is available to them if sufficient interest exists. I am certainly not suggesting that rural parents should be *pressured* into considering Immersion, but simply that they should be suitably informed.

Intensive French (Grade 5):

- I support the introduction of Intensive French (IF) for non-Immersion students in Grade 5. Personally, I would prefer to see this offered as an optional program, but in order to achieve the government's ambitious goal of 70% of students graduating with the ability to communicate effectively in French, it seems clear that it will need to be mandatory as a boost for the Core program. I understand that there are concerns about the suitability of this program for some students with special needs. I do hope that proper steps are being taken to ensure that the program is accessible to as many students as possible and I trust that appropriate arrangements will be made for students who are not well-served by Intensive French.

- I would also argue that you should consider implementation of the Intensive French program earlier than Grade 5. To maximize students' proficiency in French, I believe that they should be given a chance to use the language as early as possible, while still respecting the wishes of many parents for their children to have a solid grounding in English literacy before learning a second language. An earlier start for Intensive French is especially important if you intend to go ahead with the plan to eliminate *all* classroom exposure to the French language prior to the introduction of IF.

Core French (K-4):

- I recognize that the Core French program in its current form has been unsuccessful for an overwhelmingly large majority of students. This is a critical concern, but I feel strongly that eliminating the program entirely is not the answer. Students entering an Intensive French program should have some prior classroom exposure to the language. I support the proposal by Drs. Dicks and Kristmanson for a Core program beginning in Kindergarten and using a method such as AIM. I am also convinced that the system would be improved by teaching French in larger blocks of time (e.g., three 50-minute blocks or two 75-minute blocks per week instead of 30 minutes of French each day). Most importantly, there must be further consultation with language learning experts to determine how the Core program can be better managed.

Grades 6-12:

- Ideally, I would prefer to see the Late French Immersion (LFI) option retained. I believe it is a very valuable program for students who did not enroll in EFI, but who decide in middle school that they wish to strive for fluency in French. However, if staffing concerns make it impossible to offer EFI, LFI and Intensive French, I would have to concede that LFI should be the program to eliminate. As has been shown by studies such as the recent one by the Ottawa-Carleton Board of Education, LFI is an academically demanding option that tends to attract a more homogeneous student body than the more equitable EFI option. Eliminating LFI would be a significant step toward addressing the concerns that have been expressed over streaming, class composition and "elitism."

- If LFI is eliminated, I support Dicks and Kristmanson's model for an enhanced Intensive French follow-up in Grades 6-8 and a core French program in Grades 9-12. The one exception is that I would propose the possibility of French courses being optional in Grades 11-12, with students tested for proficiency after Grade 10.

Focus on practical conversational French:

- Although I went through the Early French Immersion system in New Brunswick and found it to be an incredibly positive experience, the one shortcoming of the program in my opinion was the lack of exposure to French as it is spoken "on the street." Despite having used my French infrequently over the last 15 years, I still have almost no trouble understanding written French or listening to "proper French" as spoken, for example, by radio and television announcers. However, when I meet Francophone Canadians who are speaking naturally and quickly, I often struggle with comprehension. This is an issue that can probably be fully addressed only through complete immersion in a Francophone setting, but I do believe that some classroom focus on understanding practical conversational French as it is spoken in Canada would be very beneficial, perhaps at the middle-school level.

Other issues:

- Like many others, I am hesitant to address the politically-charged issue of inclusion in classrooms. I will also admit to being far from knowledgeable on this topic. However, it is my impression that the management of New Brunswick's inclusion policies is a major culprit in the issues that are currently being blamed primarily on the presence of Early French Immersion. In principle, I am a strong supporter of inclusion, but my understanding is that, in practice, it has not necessarily been beneficial for the students involved to be in standard classrooms at all times. Furthermore, my sense is that teachers are often forced to deal with insufficient resources for the proper implementation of New Brunswick's ambitious inclusion policies. To truly address the problems in our current system, the funding and management of the inclusion program must be revisited.

- I believe that social promotion, the practice of allowing a student to move on to a higher grade despite not having satisfied the learning outcomes of their current grade, should also be seriously examined.

- I would also like to see the government consider the possibility of introducing a year of Junior Kindergarten, focusing on providing a fun environment in which students can begin working on early literacy and numeracy skills, along with some initial exposure to the French language. Clearly, this would be a costly program, but one well worth considering.

In summary, I sincerely appreciate the fact that you have recognized the significant shortcomings of our current system and that you are ambitious enough to tackle these problems. However, I firmly believe that your goals can be achieved without the elimination of the Early French Immersion program. I also believe that we are doing a disservice to our students if we attempt to rush this process. While I understand the desire to devise and implement a program in time for the 2008-2009 school year, I hope that you will recognize if this is not feasible and that you will consider working with experts over the next few months to ensure that the absolute best system is developed and properly implemented for the benefit of all New Brunswick children.

Thank you for your attention.

We all want our children have the best education possible from the public school system. It is just going to be that some kids excel and some don't. I really believe if we didn't have social promotion it would help. We need to have smaller, much smaller class room size and help for the struggling students. We can't lower the bar for everyone, we need to up the bar in the system to help those kids that really need it. We need education for parents to make the best choice for their children. I would like to see principles and staff making presentations about EFI/Core French to the parents have a script to follow and not have personal opinions about either program. It really needs to be known that EFI is for English speaking parents and that help is available to anyone who is in need. Core French also needs to have some French in the program. I really believe EFI it is a way for "the lower income" or "uneducated parents" to increase their childs knowledge and give them a better education and a chance to not fall through the cracks. And yes, Core French should teach French from grade 1 - 4 and then offer intensive in grade 5. Making grade 5 manditory for some is very unfair and doesn't accomplish the goal, a better education system for all!

I totally agree that the French Immersion Program has NOT been good and help is needed.
Firstly, the anglophone students who have opted to receive their basic learning in their own language are being penalized. Only the selected few were accepted to remain in the program...had to be able to cope and not have any behavioral problems...or they were sent back to the English program no matter what time of year and the English teachers were to deal with it. In turn...what happened to the class of the English students who were trying to excel in their own language. NOT FAIR !!!!
It is not necessary for the anglophones to turn their back on English learning to acquire a job in New Brunswick.....if they can converse in the other language.... that's all the majority of francophones do and they do just fine.
Going into French conversation at a later date is the way to go. I strongly agree that conversing in the 2 languages is great......but it is important that learning other subjects to the best of the students ability will make better educated students...and that's what education is all about.
I have a teaching background, though not lately, and I know that if a student doesn't get off to a good start it's hard to cope for the rest of his or her learning.
I applaud the Minister of Education for standing up to his convictions and I think he is on the right track !!!!

Dear Mr. Lamrock,
I grew up in NB but have lived in BC, Alberta, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Quebec. There are good immersion programmes in all of these provinces. I returned from Quebec last fall, and the first thing I checked was whether I could place my children in the immersion programme in NB, so that my children would not lose the French they had gained elsewhere. They were placed, and we moved back to NB. Brain drain reversed!
I have an autistic sister whose first language is English, who managed to perform as well as could be expected in any language in the early immersion programme here in NB, and later in Alberta, where she continued to study in French and is now trilingual; she has since learned Spanish and some Italian. I believe that the core issue in NB's education system is not the fairness of Early French Immersion - children entering the programme have not undergone testing and it is as flat an entry-level playing field as could be. I do not believe that streaming is something that EFI propagates. If that were so, my autistic sister would not have been enrolled.
The real crisis is support for children with educational challenges; and this is a residual problem from the decision to integrate and the failure to put enough resources in play for children with special needs, their parents, and the teachers who work with them (not one on one, which many actually need, at least for a few hours a day - but in a crowded classroom, where several individual education plans are almost impossible to maintain while teaching basic curriculum to the class at large).
My husband was an educator and is now a principal in Quebec. While we lived there, I was Governing Board Chair at our English school. On that board were all community stakeholders: teachers, parents, and community representatives. I am surprised that our educators have been silenced in this process; I'd have thought it much more productive to include them. They are on the front lines.
In QC, English schools teach 50% English and 50% French - and EVERYONE emerges with decent French fluency, despite the same problem of inadequate resources for special needs.
My children made the transition from the QC 50/50 programme into the NB immersion programme here seamlessly. Both are performing well. Please take a careful look at the structure of Quebec's 50/50 programme, if true bilingualism for all - an inclusive approach - is something that NB really wants to pursue. I believe it would be for the general public good - even the children of those parents who are not open to their child learning a second language. Certainly QC is faring much better than we are in their standardized testing scores. I believe this is something that could benefit NB as Canada's only officially bilingual province. It would also mean that we could keep our French educators - for team teaching is how the 50/50 programme works - a French teacher and an English teacher switching two full classes back and forth. In a pilot programme run at our school, to facilitate early absorption of the second language, the classes rotated back and forth on a week/week basis for kindergarten, grade one, and grade two. In grade three, it switched to day/day rotation with half days in each on Friday. This system worked incredibly well, and provided teachers facing challenges in the classroom with a partner with whom to discuss, strategize, and find solutions - not to mention support. The other key programme was early intervention through a one-on-one reading programme in grades one and two, staffed by volunteer parents. This helped improve literacy levels and the transition from learning to read to reading to learn, for no teacher has time for the amount of one-on-one with a group.
ALL stakeholders, including educators, should be part of the consultation process. I think if they were included, it would become abundantly clear that resources for children facing learning challenges is where we really need to place our greatest efforts - if that key piece is in place, greater freedom of choice of what programme to place your child in would be greatly enhanced; the greatest inhibitor to choice is lack of educational support and resources. And the teachers would be liberated a little and more able to effectively teach our curriculum.

L'abolition de l'immersion est un pr�texte pour sauver de l'argent. Les anglophones ne veulent pas apprendre le fran�ais et donner un programme intensif en 5e ou 6e ann�e ne changera rien. Si le gouvernement voulait vraiment que les anglophones sortent bilingues de l'�cole, les cours de fran�ais seraient beaucoup plus consistants et il ne serait pas possible d'obtenir un dipl�me de 12e ann�e sans r�ussir les cours de fran�ais: quand le taux d'�chec de la 12e ann�e sera de 70% parce qu'ils ne peuvent pas parler fran�ais, l'apprentissage de la langue prendra son importance... mais la volont� politique manque. Historiquement les francophones n'ont pas eu le choix d'apprendre l'anglais: "on a mis cette langue dans notre bouche" comme le dit l'expression anglaise. Qu'on fasse de m�me pour les Anglais! Dans un contexte de mondialisation, l'uniliguisme des Anglophones nuit au d�veloppement de la province.

I wish to commend Kelly Lamrock for making a bold, informed and necessary decision to improve our children's educations. I support his initial decision 100% and know that many, many parents I have spoken to feel the same way. Because of the negative and inflamatory comments expressed by many opposing his decision, parents who support the minister are not coming forward with their opinions. We realize this whole "debate" is not about making your "opponents" look and feel bad. It is about keeping an open mind to others' opinions (not bashing them), and moving forward with changes instead of having children remain in a broken and stagnant education system.

The only way to know whether any change (education system or otherwise) will actually bring positive results is to implement the change. I'm not saying that the changes proposed by the minister are perfect. I'm saying that they should be moving forward in 2008 and they should be adjusted as required as time goes on. No one can expect a large-scale sweeping change to be perfect in its first implementation - that is unrealistic.

I believe the minister is absolutely on the right foot to begin improving our kids' educations. Focus on the full education - make sure children learn subjects in their primary language in the early years. Expose them to a class or two a day of a secondary language. Then when they are ready for it (grade 4 or 5), introduce the Intensive French program.

I hope and pray that Kelly Lamrock moves ahead with his initial decision to remove the Early French Immersion program from our education system. (I do wish he would include at least one class per day of French instruction in English schools and vice versa - English instruction in French schools). But, the main point is to make changes now - not in another year. The system is broken - there is no doubt about that. Begin the process of fixing it - why procrastinate? Why allow our children to spend one more year in an ineffective educational system? We've waited too long for improvements. Time to take a step towards a solution. And, Mr. Lamrock, you have been the first minister to actually do more than "talk the talk". You are on the right track. I hope you don't back down and give in to negativity now. Keep up the good work.

Mr. Lamrock,

I'm so tired of the department of education's lack of support and their ignorance in accountability that I'm glad that mr lamrock is addressing the French second language issue. However having said that I don't agree with his decision to eliminate French from the early grades. I would like to see French introduced in kindergarten .If this government has to cancel something cancel late immersion and have intensive French throughout all schools for all grades..
I wish I could be present to watch the minister and the department of education watch the information video that parents like myself had to watch here in district six in order to make to decision to place our children in the French program or not .It was so boring there were a few that did fall asleep and the video quality was a disgrace and yet still we had 37 signed up for immersion at Sussex elementary and 11 at the Sussex corner so does that not tell you that parents really want the chance to have their children learn French.
This government and the one before it has to take responsibility for condition of our French second language programs.

My eldest son graduated from the early immersion program and my youngest son who is also in the early immersion program will be entering grade six this year .I'm very proud of the choice I made to have them in French and I'm prouder still when I hear them use it. This year's time on task is down at the Sussex middle school again... I'm wondering how the current department of education expects students to be bilingual when they are getting even less the required amount of French instruction then they should be getting. I assumed when I placed my children in immersion that they would getting the required amount of time on task .I also assumed that our department of education and district education councils would make sure policies and guidelines were followed ..What a letdown that has been. Currently we have no methods and resource teacher available for our immersion students at this middle school. I've heard much talk about segregation and streaming is it any wonder why parents are opting out of the program when there has not been any support made available for students. I would love to walk in a school and be able to tell that there is two languages in existence showing both English and French posters on walls and where students are signing our national anthem in English and french .

Why is this not happening in a bilingual province because the department of education and districts like here in Sussex do not care that school staff over the years have contributed to streaming by allowing schools and its staff to tell parents who have children in kindergarten I don't think your child can learn French or hey they don't really need it here anyways this is an English community there is no use for French in Sussex. I have been going to these schools watching and listening for many years it is a shame what has been allowed to happen and yet the government blames it on a program .It's not the program mr lamrock it's the people running these programs that are at fault . I truly hope that you listen to the parents.

Our family supports your decision to eliminate EFI.
It is obvious that the current system is not working.
As a supply teacher I have seen first hand the tremendous, negative divide between the core and immersion programs.

We, think you are showing great courage in addressing the failures of the current system, and are willing to make the needed changes so that all NB children are educated equally.

I am a product of EFI and I am forever grateful for the high level of competency of french that I have acheived and still use almost on a daily basis as a result of this exceptional program. What gives me great concern is that my three children will not have the same opportunity to become fluently bilingual as I did.

The program works. I find it upsetting that the comments in support of Mr. Lamrocks' proposed changes on this site, and other sites for that matter, are from those who fail to indicate any form of previous involvement, past experience with the program or general ability to function in french as a second language themselves. People having direct links to the EFI program comment almost always positively on its value.

I dismiss the report that Mr. Lamrock wants to use to justify his decision for removing EFI because it is clear to many other academics who specialize in statistical analysis that it is flawed to the core.

In order to acheive compromise however, I would suggest that the school day be made longer (I know it was longer when I was younger)and retain EFI. We are a bilingual province and early french immersion instruction deserves a fixed place in our education system now and forever.

Dear Mr. Lamrock,

I can not support your proposed FSL educational reform. It is absurd that anyone can believe that by cancelling EFI, our Anglophone children's math, literacy, and science scores will miraculously improve. The outcome of this plan will ultimately be no significant change in the above stated scores. However, we will see a dramatic decrease in the number of bilingual students graduating.

How will eliminating EFI help a child who in struggling in math or the dyslexic child? Clearly, these children must be identified by grade one at the lastest and receive special help. Currently, this frequently does not happen in our educational system. Often, only the more severely delayed children receive assistance. I feel all struggling students deserve the help they need to help them reach their potential. Clearly, this government does not value this and just wishes to place all students in one 'stream'. Does this government not realize that different students have different needs, strengths, and weaknesses?

Obviously, more money needs to be spent on M&R individuals, teacher aids, and on mentors. In terms of improving literacy, I recommend that you look at the DIBELS system (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills). DIBELS is a set of standardized, individually administered measures of early literacy development. They are designed to be short (one minute) fluency measures used to regularly monitor the development of pre-reading and early reading skills (kindergarten through grade 3). The DIBELS program is being used in many schools across the U.S. and is very effective at quickly identifying many children at risk in terms of literacy. Please check this program out at www.uoregon.edu. However, there is no point in identifying at risk children if you don't have the resources available to help them, so this needs to be a priority.

In order to improve the French skills of all our students I believe that French should begin being taught in kindergarten. Mr. Lamrock, you state that French should be taught like math, science, etc. to all students and I agree with that. However, we do not wait to grade 5 to teach these subjects, so why do you feel it is acceptable to wait until grade 5 to teach French? It is not. The AIM program (Accelerated Integrated Method) is a wonderful interactive model or Netten's Intensive French should be taught in Kindergarten to all students. Once children complete kindergarten, they should then be given the choice to enter EFI or an enhanced core French program (continue the AIM program). Or you could offer EFI in kindergarten to those who wish to enroll and the AIM program to all others. With either of these two suggestions we would see an increase in the number of truly bilingual graduates in our province. Also, I believe there should be some sort of standardized measures of testing in French given to students in both programs every 2-3 years to determine their level of proficiency and to accurately measure the success of the programs. Core French is clearly not successful, so improve it. EFI is successful, so keep it but add resources so that it is more inclusive. Also, a huge reason EFI is not more inclusive in so many parts of our province is due to district and school administration
personnel ignorance. Many parents who have children with behavior or learning difficulties are discouraged from enrolling their child in EFI by district &/or school administration. I feel this is unfair and unfortumate, as these children can greatly benefit from learning a second language. Perhaps this wouldn't happen if there were more resources available to these children and if parents and district/school personnel were more educated.

You state repeatedly that you are eliminating EFI in favor of a late immersion program due to streaming. Well the streaming effect is much more evident with late immersion than with early immersion, so you must clearly not wish to offer late immersion. While other provinces are looking at eliminating late immersion programs in favor of EFI only, NB is doing the opposite. We have become the laughing stock of all FSL educational systems.

The people of New Brunswick will not accept the government cancelling the most proven and effective way to learn a second language (EFI)in order to reduce streaming. There are many more productive ways to reduce streaming. You have many resources available to you and lots of good suggestions in terms of improving our educational system, while maintaining EFI. Let's hope you care enough about bilingualism to listen. Over the past 4 months there has been no evidence of this. There is a lot at stake for our children and they deserve more than just receiving the basics. They deserve as good of a FSL education as any student in any of the other provinces is able to get (EFI). Your FSL proposal will bring us 30 years backwards and this is not acceptable. Please reinstate EFI for another year and take the time to really study and develop the best educational system possible. This cannot be rushed. Our children deserve more than a haste, unproven, and ineffective FSL program.

Thank you

Early French emersion program is very popular and highly successful as can be seen from many letters and commentaries posted by individuals and various institutions. This program should not be cut - quite the opposite all students should be encouraged to enrol into EARLY French emersion with the possibility to phase out in grade 5. Changes to the school system that I would propose are:
- start Early English Emersion program in French language schools;
- over the next 5-10 years require all teachers of specialist courses from grade 5 and up to have at least Bachelors degree level education in the subject that they are teaching. So for example teacher of Mathematics must have at least B.Sc. in Mathematics etc.
- reinstate 1 year B.Education programs at all NB Universities for graduates with various Bachelor's degrees;
- encourage various programs (in English and French) that are mixing students from French and English school districts.

We are very upset with the potential loss of EFI. Our son will be entering 3rd grade in the Early French Immersion program and had every hope to put out daughter, who is entering Kindergarten this fall into the EFI program once she entered grade 1. We made the decision to place our children in the EFI program, because we as parents felt that the best choice for them considering we live in a bilingual province. We do understand that this is not the choice of all parents for their children. We are very upset that our choice is in jeopardy of being taken away.