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 Mr. Lamrock,

THE ELIMINATION OF ESI AT JOHN CALDWELL SCHOOL WILL RESULT IN COMMUNITY SEGREGATION OF ANGLOPHONE STUDENTS (I hope this never become a newspaper headline - only you can stop it!)

As a concerned parent from the Grand Falls region I wanted to make sure my opinions and comments are a part of the provincial submissions on EFI. As part of a group of concerned parents and parent representatives we met with you in May to discuss the continuation of the EFI program in Grand Falls. At the time we were impressed with the concern and respect that we were received with and we are still hoping our concerns can be addressed (but the silence is deafening!!!!).

We all understand the philosophy behind the new elementary school program (elimination of EFI and core to be replaced by intensive French in grade 5 and the choice of late immersion 6-10) - the core of the philosophy being removing the segregation of the student population in K-4.

In Grand Falls and the surrounding JCS school catchment region we have a population composed of ~ 80% French and 20% English - the EFI program at John Caldwell School has been very well subscribed by Anglophones - this year 32 out of 38 students were enrolled in the early French immersion program - the reason! - our children NEED to be able to speak French as early as possible to allow them as English speaking children to INTEGRATE into the community - sports, community activities etc. that will then prepare them to be a part of their community as they grow up. The elimination of the EFI program or the change of it in any way will result in segregation and exclusion of our children - is this what NB is about?

We are the only bilingual province in Canada and in many of the predominantly francophone regions of the province, there are a certain percentage of Anglophones present. In the past there have been ethnic tensions, but since the increase in importance in FSL (and especially EFI programs) much of this tension has been eliminated. We understand that bilingualism costs funding dollars, creates a need for additional resources and creates issues surrounding the hiring of early French immersion teachers - this is the price we pay for the province we live in and I don't think we can change it - it is a burden we have to bare - and in the language of the youth today my message to you and ESPECIALLY to the senior administration in your department - superintendents included "suck it up! And deal!"

As a New Brunswicker who is familiar with many parts of the province and its people it is so evident to me that the people involved in these decisions do not KNOW our province - they know Fredericton, Saint John and possibly Moncton - urbanites all.
If you think I am deluded - Dr, Willms the creator of the proposed changes, grew up in BC (Victoria), got his PhD. in California - and has lived all his time in NB in Fredericton at UNB (and if I know many professors in his position that means he has spent 50% of his time in Fredericton!). Mr. Lamrock began his early life in BC and the rest in Fredericton, Highschool and University. What also concerns me is all the staff in the Anglophone Department of Education with the exception of the office administration staff, are all Anglophones (I would like to know how many can even speak French - the answer to this might bring some enlightenment!) - knowing many of these people and their ages I know that they all have underlying opinions with respect to French and French people that are not really positive - my guess and opinion (I do not know it to be fact) is that many of them do not think learning French is important for New Brunswickers and with the headaches it causes the department they will be all very glad to see it removed. Of course we can leave in Late French immersion and the intensive French but if enrollment drops off that will be quick to go to!)

For this province and its history there is no one size fits all - it doesn't make it easy, it is not simple but if you want it to work you will have to do it the hard way - and French is a part of the province regardless of what the "older" generation of bureaucrats may think.

I know the minster genuinely wants change for the better, the improvement of the education of the youth in NB and he thinks (along with Mr. Willm) that NB's are just resisting these changes because they are resisting change - I will have you know that I know Tim Jackson (the concerned parent that led the court challenge) as he is a person I deal with in regards to the technology and economic development of NB - there is no one who works any harder for NB and the economic development and technology change for the industries in NB - what we would call as true change agent - he is a proud Saint Johner who has got a very good education, moved to Ontario and moved back to the province to help keep our province viable - he is also proud to speak very good French and believes it is important for his children to do so as well - and you think this is about resistance to change - something doesn't ring true.

I hope and plead Mr. Lamrock that you and your staff decide not to segregate the Anglophone and francophone communities of this province that today co-exist and have grown to work together for common goals, that you have developed or will develop a true understanding of the linguistic and education needs of this province and that you do not continue to think and implement education policy as arrogant anglo's!

DON'T SEGREGATAE INTEGRATE - LEAVE EFI ALONE! PROVIDE MORE RESOURCES FOR CHALLENGED LEARNERS THIS IS WHAT WILL REALLY RESULT IN INCLUSION AND RAISE LITERACY SCORES _ ADD DON'T CUT - IF YOU CAN"T AFFORD IT FINANCIALLY >>>>>>WELL THAT'S A DECISION YOU HAVE TO MAKE BUT BE HONEST ABOUT IT DON'T HIDE BEHIND RETORICT AND **!

A concerned Parent and Proud citizen of a future self-sufficient New Brunswick
(unless I choose to move to Alberta to enroll my children in EFI!)

Dear Minister Lamrock:

In order to foster equal opportunity to learn and achieve in all subjects (especially English, math, science) there must be a strong understanding of each students needs and their abilities. For example, 20% of all children have dyslexia (a language processing problem). These children are the struggling readers and writers who do not score well on the literacy tests and will likely struggle with literacy throughout their lives because their brains are wired differently than their peers. These SEP students will not disappear regardless of which language they are instructed in. Their diagnosis is real and they need an education plan that will work for them. Regardless of which language they are learning they will struggle but ultimately with early intervention and resource they will succeed. Therefore, in order to increase literacy scores you need to teach children differently. Offer them different ways to process language and this should begin in kindergarten. For example, stop singing the 26-letter alphabet and introduce the alphabet as 33 sounds. Color-code each sound and use a mascot. You have to light up other pathways for these students. Flash cards are not going to cut it. Streaming and class composition issues necessitate smaller class sizes and increased resources. Ultimately you have to decrease class sizes and increase resources especially in the primary years.

If there is a strong concern about how NB scored on the PISA results compared to the rest of Canada, then why not investigate other provinces to see what works. The leading province in Canada is Alberta. Let's go to Alberta. What do we know? Alberta has a world class learning system. Countries around the world are studying their system. Why don't we? The Minister of Education, Dave Hancock, is in his 4th term. Alberta is getting FEDERAL money from the 2008-2009 Program Expansion and Development for French Immersion. Federal money sounds cost effective to me. Please note the small average class sizes (K-3: 18.4, 4-6: 21.3, 7-9: 22.5, 10-12: 22.7) and vast educational choices (the key word here being choice) in the Alberta education system . Alberta has public, Catholic, Francophone, private and charter schools as well as home education, online schools, and alternative programs. If Alberta is not the province of choice, what about Newfoundland? It is the site of the Intensive French pilot and does continue to offer Early French Immersion. Newfoundland also scored above NB in the PISA results. In fact, every province scored above NB so what are these provinces doing that we are not?

I estimate the cost to train an anglophone nurse French as a second language to be $40,000. This training happens over a number of years. Several hours each week this nurse presents for FSL instruction paid for by the Department of Health. Let's keep in mind that this individual already works full-time and may have a family. I am certain that learning French as a second language this late in life certainly would not be a priority. These so-called health care dollars are not being spent on purchasing a mammogram machine nor are they being used to purchase medications for cancer treatments. This money should be transferred to the education budget where, if invested correctly, would yield get a significant return on investment in 7 short years.

Please keep in mind that almost half of NB students are already on their way to becoming functionally bilingual with the current education system. To standardize the current FSL system, we would need to have all students enter an Early French Immersion program as it takes years to learn a second language, not months. One suggestion might be to offer AIM Core K-2 then have every student enter grade 3 with 50% of the curriculum being offered in French until grade 9 followed by French maintenance 10-12. The only bilingual province in Canada needs to give all kids an opportunity to acquire strong French second language skills. Enrichment and physical activity opportunities can be offered and should be offered to students within the regular curriculum in either French or English. As well, parents and communities can support kids in learning a second language by acknowledging the value of French and the importance of being functionally bilingual.

I want this government to be successful. I want this government to be looking 6 or 10 years down the road. I want this government to implement a strong and successful education program for New Brunswick students. The children of today will be the leaders of tomorrow.

Please accept this as my comments further to the letter issued by the Department of Education requesting to hear my view, as a parent and proposals on addressing all the perceived issues facing New Brunswick's education system.

A lot of my feelings have been expressed by others (and far more eloquently) but I wanted to at least record my feelings of discontent primarily with the elimination of the early French immersion program. It is unfortunate, that when consultation was done two years (?) ago regarding French Second Language, that it was not openly discussed that elimination of the early French immersion program was a possibility. Perhaps all of this upset could have been addressed and been dealt with then rather than being fast tracked to two weeks around March Break and six weeks during Summer vacation 2008.

I am very disappointed at the thoughts of living in the only bilingual province in Canada and not having an early French immersion program. Children are such little sponges soaking up information and yet uninhibited in their capacity to not be self conscious when perfecting their new found skills.

Other areas within other jurisdictions "fight" to have early French immersion programs brought to their schools in provinces other than New Brunswick and here we are getting a "reprieve" from annihilating our program. I am deeply saddened to think that the Department of Education feels that the only option is to get rid of the program (early immersion) in entirety.

I have two children currently in the early immersion program and wonder what can be said for the quality of education that they are receiving since the current program has not been properly supported and has them "grandfathered" in.

I did not have the opportunity to take early immersion myself 35 years ago and wished that I would have been able to have the opportunity to be bilingual at an early age.

It is realized that the EFI is only one of the many areas being targeted (music, art, physical education, math skills, literacy and French second language). There are no easy solutions but at the same time there is no "perfect" system. We are all striving for what is best for our children but it is hard to believe that making the intensive program in Grade 5 mandatory is going to boost our French proficiency.

So in closing, I would really like to think that this process over the last six weeks has not been for not.

Thank you for your consideration.

I strongly support your decision to eliminate the Early French Immersion Program. I am a early years teacher and a mother of young children. As a mother, I want my children to learn to read and write in their mother tongue first. I believe that my children can and will learn to speak French in the Late Immersion Program. As a teacher, I agree with the points that you have made. Please follow through with your decision!

Mr Lamrock,
My husband and I are the parents of three children. Our oldest is an extremely successful, self motivated student. She was in the top of her 5th grade immersion class. When we saw the ease at which she learned a second language, we knew we did not want to deny our other children this opportunity. When she was in grade one she was able to meet her francophone teacher in the grocery store and have an effortless conversation.

Our son struggled in grade one. We knew he was having issues and requested a psycho-educational evaluation. This request was made in January/February. It took 4 months for the district to receive the paperwork for the evaluation. During this time we had various meetings with teachers and support staff. We were told there was no resource available because he was in immersion. ( I later learned this was untrue) We had a hard time getting answers from the school and from the district. Over and over again we were told we could pay to have an assessment done privately to a tune of $1500-2000. Money which we could not afford. It seems there is no clear cut protocol in helping a struggling student. We saw how difficult it was to get answers and we were not willing to waste another school year, watching him suffer.

We made the difficult decision to move him into the English program and to our neighborhood school. In grade two, his teacher got the ball rolling in the first week of school and by the end of September he had his assessment and an SEP was started. He's done much better in school this year and the accommodations on his SEP are minimal but make all the difference for him. His learning disability has nothing to do with reading or learning a language. It is a struggle with writing (dysgraphia). Had we known this sooner, he may have stayed in immersion. In my search to find the tools necessary to help him I have come across this software. http://www.wordq.com/index.html Schools in Ontario are using it and it would go a long way in making classrooms more inclusive in English and French. http://www.bloorview.ca/bloom/t_school_students.html

Another concern I have is that of transferability. We moved to New Brunswick from PEI. We chose where to live, based on the availability of EFI. Having gone to 9 schools in 12 years in three provinces, I believe it's important to have consistent curriculum/programs across the region.

My suggestions for improving the school system in New Brunswick would be these:
Develop a clear and precise protocol for assessing struggling students. Have this available on every school website so parents know where their child is in the process and can ensure that matters are being dealt with in a timely manner.
Make available, assistive technology such as http://www.wordq.com/index.html laptops for students who need them or an option for parents to purchase tools at reduced rates.
Keep an early immersion entry point of K or grade one but add proper support.
Have the student services departments responsible for assessments, work through the summer to clear up the backlog. The waiting list is too long when there is so much at stake. Contract this work out to private psychologists.
Create EFI resources for parents to use at home such as audio cd's with correct pronunciations.
Provide more information on the benefits of a second language to parents.
Have a checklist to complete before a student leaves a program. Was everything done for this student? Did we accommodate their learning style?
Add AIM for elementary students not in immersion.
Summer studies programs for teachers wanting to train in Resource and Method.

I hope you take the time to re-evaluate and delay any changes until a better system can be developed. My third child's education depends upon it.

As a teacher of Early French Immersion I see first hand the benefits and progress that this program makes in the lives of students. As a student of psychology in university I know that both brain studies and language experts agree that children can soak up so much more information at an early age, rather than waiting longer to learn a new language.
I do agree however, that there needs to be changes to some of the programs. I witness the frustrations of teachers whose classes are overloaded with Special Education Plans (SEPs) to teach all the outcomes of the curriculum given when they do not have nearly enough support for these students. We need to give one on one support to the students who truly need it and in turn all involved will benefit. We also need more resources for these students and the teachers that teach them. Early French Immersion is not a perfect program, it too needs more support. Last year, math mentors were introduced into our district but this support was not available to the EFI students, nor is the resource option that is offered to the English students. Also, in the study that was released, it mentioned the high number of students who drop out of the Early French Immersion program in high school. There may be students who drop out but it is not because of the program itself, rather there are not adequate classes offered in French at that level so they are forced to follow their area of interest (for university purposes) in English. As I stated before, I do agree that changes need to be made such as offering more courses (core/mandatory courses) in high school in French and requiring the students to take several French courses each semester as to keep their oral and written languages up to the level where they need to be.
I believe that eliminating the EFI program would only serve to separate the Anglophone and Francophone populations of our province. With the proposed plan of right now, the graduating students would come out with a lower proficiency level then the graduates of today. How then do we expect them to stay in this province together if their lines of communication are not as advanced as they could be? I know from personal experience that having "bilingual" on a resume increases your chances of being hired and gives you an edge over someone who may not be able to claim this. I have also worked in public service jobs and being able to greet out of province/country visitors in their native tongue is greatly appreciated by them.
There are other options, Mr. Lamrock, to better our education system here in New Brunswick without eliminating a program that has proven it works. We need more support for our teachers and students, the students come first and this proposal does the opposite. It is taking away a right, a freedom and choice from those who wish to learn another language early on, so they can be proficient in both tongues of our great province. Please reconsider. Merci.

I believe the decision to scrap EFI is 100% wrong. I do understand there are different points of view in the province and many of the opinions expressed are a result of one's experience with the educational system, be it positive or negative. However, the reality is that we live in a bilingual province. I am an anglophone in a government job who has reached the top level that an anglophone can reach right now (not very far). I am faced with the fact that I am anglophone everyday in my job.
I do have a child in French Immersion and one starting kindergarten this year. The decision to put my oldest in EFI was not an easy one. I would have loved for her to be in English and make her way through school as I did. However, that is not in her best interest in this province. Until the requirement to be bilingual is eliminated from the jobs in this province, we owe it to our children to have a program in place that will give them the best chance for their future. However, the fact is, bilingualism will always be part of our province. The program Mr Lamrock has proposed will never produce the level of bilingual graduates this province is looking for.
So, my suggestion would be to keep EFI , although changes may be warranted. There are various trains of thought on the proper age for children to learn a second language, however, perhaps a grade 3 or 4 entry point would be better to allow for a better grasp of the English language but still start young enough to take advantage of an eager, open mind. It's a shame there are people who believe the supporters of EFI are using this as a status symbol. I make decisions for my children based on what I feel is right, not because I am hoping I've 'impressed' someone with my child's EFI 'status'. Unfortunately, Mr Lamrock has fed this mindset with his arrogant attitude towards parents who support EFI.At the end of the day, I want to know that my child has covered the appropriate curriculum, no matter which language she is learning the material in.
As far as streaming, how do you propose to prevent that in middle school? EFI is blamed for streaming, but if the resources were available, many more children would have stayed in EFI and lessened this effect.
Increases in phys-ed and music are a nice thought, but not until the money is properly allocated to helping the English program and the EFI program. Why isn't the priority to reduce class size in the English classes and provide more support there, before putting money into phys-ed and music? Wouldn't that make more sense?
I stand firm that EFI shouldn't be eliminated, however I am open to suggestions that would benefit all of our children. Eliminating EFI is the wrong thing for this province.

I am writing in response to the request for public input on french immersion. After reading a tremendous number of research articles, following the public debates and meeting with school district officials, it is clear that early (k-Grade1)immersion is the only method of french language instruction that is proven to provide our children with the opportunity to achieve advanced standing in French. Intensive French, though currently popular and more effective than core programs, does not have the research behind it to justify an overhaul of our French language instruction practices in New Brunswick. We do not yet have data to even report the level of french for the small cohort of students who participated in the pilot studies of intensive French.
The decision on programming for this fall, and for years to come, should be grounded in good research. Until you can prove that an alternate program WILL work to graduate advanced level standing, please allow our children the right to take part in the only program we know works.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide input and feedback in this process. Thank you.

should keep Emmersion in grade one the younger the child is the better he will get it. My girl is entering grade one this fall and i hope she will get the chance to speak French at younger age. Relative are from Quebec and it's hard for them to understand her and French is harder to learn then English. The children of this province should have a chance to learn it as soon as possible. younger the child is less shy it will be for them to speak French.

Je suis un enseignant d'immersion depuis quelques ann�es d�j� et il y a plusieurs points qui me pr�occupent en ce qui concerne la d�cision de M. Lamrock d'abolir le programme d'immersion pr�coce.
Premi�rement, pourquoi sommes-nous la seule province au Canada qui veuille s'en d�barasser? En Nouvelle-�cosse par exemple, on commence l'immersion en maternelle et on n'entend pas que cela emp�che les petits n�o-�cossais de bien apprendre l'anglais. De plus, on dit souvent que nous sommes la province avec le taux d'apprentissage le plus bas. Pourquoi ne pas faire comme les autres provinces et garder l'immersion? Cela ne semble pas affecter la performance des autres provinces.
Deuxi�mement, on dit que le programme n'est pas efficace. Cependant, a-t-on vraiment mis toutes les ressources et toutes les structures n�cessaires � son succ�s? Est-ce qu'on s'assure qu'il y a du perfectionnement continu pour les enseignants d'immersion afin qu'ils soient au courant des meilleures techniques d'enseignement?
Troisi�mement, quand on compare la compr�hension et la comp�tence orale entre les �l�ves d'immersion pr�coce et ceux du programme de fran�ais intensif, force est de constater que les �l�ves d'immersion sortent gagnants. Le fran�ais intensif doit remplacer le fran�ais cadre, pas l'immersion.
Quatri�mement, on dit qu'il y a plus de d�fis dans une classe du programme cadre � cause de l'immersion. Mais si on place les �l�ves d'immersion dans les classes r�guli�res, comment cela diminue-t-il le nombre d'�l�ves ayant des difficult�s? �a ne fera que plus d'�l�ves dans le programme cadre.
Pour finir, si c'est vrai que le fait d'avoir l'immersion emp�che les �l�ves de mieux apprendre leur langue maternelle, pourquoi avons-nous les m�mes pr�occupations vis-�-vis l'apprentissage de la langue maternelle du c�t� francophone ou m�me aux �tats-Unis, deux milieux qui n'ont pas d'immersion?
R�glons les vrais probl�mes du syst�me d'�ducation n�o-brunswickois au lieu de se d�barasser de l'immersion, un programme qui a permis a plusieurs Canadiens de devenir bilingues.

As a product of the Early French Immersion system in New Brunswick, I base my opinions on my own personal experience and would like to say that I am a strong supporter of the program. I remained in French Immersion through grade 12 and graduated from high school with a bilingual certificate in 1992. I went on to university and graduated with a Bachelor of Commerce degree in 1996 but due to course loads was not able to enrol in any French classes throughout university. I then worked in a job which did not require the use of the French language for several years. In 2005, I commenced employment with the Federal Government and was required to do language testing to see where I stood with regard to French. I passed the three sets of tests (grammar, vocabulary and oral) and am certified as bilingual by the Government of Canada at an advanced level -- keep in mind that I was able to achieve this even though I had not worked on my French language skills in 13 years! I think that in itself says a lot for the program - obviously it gave me sufficient skills to carry with me throughout my life.

When it comes to my own children, there was never any question as to whether or not they would be enroled in EFI and now I am extremely disappointed to come to the realization that they may not get that opportunity. It makes me truly sad that had I not chosen to stay in my home province of NB instead of leaving after university as many graduates do, that my children would have had the opportunity elsewhere to benefit from an EFI system. I thought New Brunswick was trying to attract young families to the province not send them away!

Please reconsider this decision.

Let me begin by welcoming the opportunity to provide input on this matter. I am hopeful that this consultation is truly sincere and that the Minister reads and carefully considers these submissions without prejudice.

On August 5th, I think it is absolutely necessary to refrain from making any program changes as there is insufficient time for the Department of Education, Administrators, schools, teachers and parents to properly prepare to deliver a quality education to our children. I appreciate the desire to improve our education system, however on a matter of such importance as provincial education program offerings, particularly FSL education, it would be unwise and reckless to implement any change without taking adequate time to evaluate the current research. I think it is also important to strive for high achievement in FSL as we would in math or literacy.

Over the next year, the government should consider the following alternatives:

The home-grown solution from Dr. Joe Dicks at the Second Language Research Institute of Canada at UNB, http://www.unbf.ca/L2/Resources/PDFs/AltPlan5.pdf

The solutions provided in the Rehorick Report, http://www.gnb.ca/0000/publications/comm/FSLStudyUNBreport.pdf

The evidence-based programs offered in other jurisdictions such as Ottawa--Final Report Review of French as a Second Language Programs, Ottawa-Carleton School Board, http://hamlit2008.googlepages.com/OCBoardofeducationFinal_Report_FSL_R.pdf

Governments should create public policy based on the best available research evidence-and every report, except for one, has recommended continuing with EFI and enhancing it by providing proper access and resources.

The province of New Brunswick needs early French Immersion. Grade five is too late!! It will be a tremendous mistake if early French Immersion is taken out! I can't imagine being a parent and having no choice for my child as to what language they will be taking in first grade. This is a grave mistake. Please reconsider! Sincerely, a very concerned citizen of New Brunswick.

I have two sons who are learning french through the AIM program. They take one hour per day, everyday. My sons have completed grades 3 and 1, and have done surprisingly well. My oldest son's ability in french is quite good. Now, with the new recommended method of total emersion in grade 5, he will have to go an entire year with no instruction at all, and risk failing grade 5 if he has difficulty with the emersion. My youngest son will have to go 3 years with no instruction. No two people learn the same way. Total emersion works for some. AIM works well for some, like our children. If there was consulatation prior to this, you would have heard from many about that. All the grade 5 proposal will do is cause some children who otherwise might do well, to endure a very stressful emersion, and possibly fail the grade. This is insane. Learning can be stressful enough in a public school. Why make it worse? I am asking you to reconsider this plan, and allow children in New Brunswick to continue in programs like AIM. It does work.

Dear Minister,

We believe New Brunswick is at a critical turning point regarding the future of French Second Language education and would like to propose some suggestions.
Of prime importance is recognizing that New Brunswick is the only officially bilingual province and should be setting standards and curriculum to create bilingual graduates who have the ability to work and function in both official languages. This is indeed a challenge for New Brunswick and any changes to the present education system need to be well planned and thought through in order to provide the best bilingual education for our children.
If we look beyond borders to European countries where functioning in two or three languages is the norm for most individuals, it would seem to make sense that New Brunswick should be forward thinking enough to create this opportunity for our children in our bilingual province and country.
Firstly, we would suggest that the New Brunswick government follow the Ombudsman's recommendation to delay any changes to the present system for a period of one year in order to allow for:
(1.) Expert opinion and consensus
(2.) To prepare for implementation of any changes that will take place.

One suggestion would be to immerse all anglophone children in Early French Second Language education beginning in kindergarten. The key to success would be to provide adequate support and resources for children who may experience difficulties. These changes would require more trained FSL teachers and therefore would necessitate a gradual implementation process. With this plan English literacy and Mathematics would be taught in English, while other subjects would be taught in French. This would ensure a sound basis of literacy and numeracy skills in English while learning French as a second language. French immersion cultural experiences should also be encouraged throughout the school years.

We are certain that an early FSL program for all students would ensure a system that provides more equality and would offer more opportunity for all New Brunswick children to become bilingual.

I strongly believe that it is very important to keep the Early French Immersion Program. Here are some reasons:
1- students learn best at a young age through song, rimes, mimes, games, etc since they are not inhibited by peers.
2- students are immerse in French if policy 309 is respected
3- students will be exposed to French for a longer period of time if enrolled in grade 1 and continue until grade 12
4- students will have a chance to participate to French cultural presentations offered to grade 1 to 8 students
5- students feel more confident about using the language
6- students can communicate in authentic situations; learning French is not only used to give directions or ask for directions

A word of caution to the Minister to please avoid making a decision in haste. If more time is needed, the mature, wise decision would be to keep things as they are for the coming school year and put more time and energy into making the best decision for the children of our province. Let's not put a quick band aid on this issue, for it will most certainly be a decision that haunts New Brunswicker for years to come. There IS a way to fix the streaming issue without dismantling EFI. Its just more time is required to do it. Make the right decision.

My wife and I have four children, ranging in age from 41 to 32. The two older children did not have the benefit of the French immersion program, only the core program. The third child took late immersion (commencing in Grade 7), while the youngest child entered the French immersion program in kindergarten (private) and continued with the program from Grade 1 up to and including Grade 12. Although our daughter who entered the program in Grade 7 has biligual capabilities, the youngest child is fully bilingual and has been teaching in the French immersion program in New Brunswick for the past 2 years (Grade 1 and Grades 3 and 4). It has never occurred to me that this wonderful opportunity to become proficient in our second official language from Grade 1 would, in 2008, be labelled by some people as "elitist", simply because some parents choose to place their children in the program while others do not.

I wish to add my support for the preservation of early French immersion and for core French instruction in the primary grades.

I agree with the arguments that have been made in support of early introduction of a second language. I now wish to address the issue of French proficiency outcomes expected from the new curriculum proposed by Minister Lamrock and the Department of Education. It is stated that the new program will provide graduates with a base in FSL and that once they leave the public school system, they can move on to enhance the skills they have acquired should they choose to do so. Since the " base " has not been clearly defined, I would like to speak to this.

First, here's a look at the current situation once high school graduates enter university. Except for Francophone students, all students wishing to enroll in a French course at UNB for the first time must take two computerized placement tests (placement testing is standard practice across the country). One test is a self-assessment test which measures one's exposure to French and the second provides an assessment of one's language level. The results of the latter are on a scale of 1 to 14. We examine those results when advising students to ensure they are placed in a course appropriate to their level. In the past, early immersion graduates have consistently scored the highest on these tests and they continue to do so. They are the ones most likely to achieve a 12 or 13. Generally, they fall in a range between 9 and 12. These results are usually achieved whether they take the tests in their first year at university or their 2nd, 3rd or 4th year. Given the broad base that they have upon arrival, they are able to maintain a fairly high level in spite of time gaps between courses. As well, adult EI graduates returning to university after 10, 15 or more years since high school still get high scores. They too have maintained a high level largely due to the solid base they acquired in school years ago. They are able to retrieve forgotten vocabulary and grammar at a very fast rate. The same cannot be said of any other group: middle or late immersion, extended core or core French. They score lower and are the ones most likely to speak of their lack of confidence in speaking the language. They are also the ones who are prone to beg us to let them take beginner courses. Basically, what they lack most is exposure to French over a long period of time. This has contributed to their weak performance and low confidence. Furthermore, they are the ones least likely to continue their study of French once they have fulfilled the language requirement for their degree, usually consisting of two term courses. The early immersion graduates are the ones most likely to continue their study of French and therefore achieve a high level of competence in the language. In short, giving students a weak base at the school level will not encourage students to pursue their study of French. To the contrary, it will serve as a deterrent since they won't have the confidence needed to tackle university level courses.

Research in the last decades has often pointed to the necessity of having a language-rich environment to ensure success in language acquisition. Among others, a prominent researcher from Stanford University identified this factor as an essential component in language acquisition and retention. In fact, he had high praise for the early immersion program in Canada. A language-rich environment is also an essential component for minority language preservation. An important study conducted in Quebec in the 1970s identified several social factors essential to the survival of a language. Though social factors cannot be completely replicated in the classroom nor in a predominantly Anglophone environment, early immersion offers the best alternative since there is total exposure for five hours a day during several years.

The outcome of the proposed program is to give students a base. I am concerned that the base will not be a strong one and will not produce the language level necessary to prepare students for a bilingual society.

In closing, I would like to make some other comments regarding this issue:
1. To my knowledge, there is no standard curriculum for immersion in high school. Some students arrive at university having read novels, poems and plays while others have not. It is therefore no surprise that the results are uneven.
2. Quantitative research has its limitations. There are many positive outcomes from the early immersion and early core French programs that cannot be measured quantitatively. A qualitative study would prove this. The most significant positive outcome is the
" rapprochement " between the two linguistic groups. It has been articulated on several occasions and as a Francophone, I have witnessed it.

All existing programs need some serious attention and Intensive French appears to address one of the concerns. However, I strongly believe that early immersion and core French instruction in the primary grades must be maintained.

I find the minister's changing views and subject focus to be rather confusing if not outright misleading since he was "subtly reminded" by the courts that democratic decisions in a democratic society must be made in a democratic manner (ie. actually involve public input in a constructive manner as opposed to simply holding forums to advise the people of previously made privately deliberated decisions). It is also disappointing the confusion created by the minister's shifting presentations of this issue seems to have created such division among our "French" and our "English" fellow provincial neighbors as it would seem we all have some very common goals and wishes with respect to the education of our children.
I am a product of the so-called EFI program as a native New Brunswicker, having graduted in 1990. Living exclusively in the sole, truly bilingual province in this country I can state from experience that a thorough advanced level of knowledge of both official languages is highly valuable for opening options with respect to career paths, volunteer opportunities in our various communities, social abilities and confidence, and the list of benefits go on. I do not question the potential that a revised "intensive french" program, as ordered, may show improved language results for our late immersion students, however I have yet to hear any accurately stated information which justifies the elimination of EFI.
As our now famous authors from Newfoundland have even replied, after realizing how their recommendations were manipulated after receipt, "intensive french" is yet to be proven. As such, it seems premature to eliminate long standing and very successful language programs in favor of one person and perhaps one department's attempts to implement budget cuts in the guise of improved education for all. It would seem that perhaps this new program does in fact warrant further review and implementation into the education mainstream - perhaps even to replace the late immersion program for which it was intended. The elimination of EFI seems however, to be counterproductive in the effort of improving education in general and certainly with respect to offering our anglophone mother tongue population the access to advanced level french skills.
Implementing even a small change can prove to be a major feat, regardless wether it be by government or individuals. Perhaps the implementation of intensive french in place of late immersion would be a more realistic step to provide proof of the new program's viability in the mainstream of our education system? What, for example, are the as yet undiscussed risks of destroying our entire existing second language system and replacing it with a mandatory and unproven system?