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.

Please do not end early french immersion. I have two daughters who have started French immersion here in New Brunswick in grade one. They are 14 and 15. Finishing grades 8 and 10. I have through the years watched them do projects in French and without even thinking about it translate from English to French. One area I see could be made stronger is the Oral French. They have no difficaulty but an accent is noted. They have said that since grade 5 the classroom has been talking in English. Doing their written work in French. I still find that to be a beautiful thing for children to learn but I can see where we could improve the program.

We now have two other children 3 and 2. If they dont have the same opportunities of language education we have to think about our future here in New Brunswick. I am from Quebec and I cannot see a future for my children if they cant compete with the Francophone community here in New Brunswick. A bilingual province.

My older daughter has mentioned over the years that it is different to hear the late immersion kids try to talk french, they are not at the same level as the early immersion ones. Does that not speak for itself. We have to compete or we should lose the status as bilingual. Make it an even playing field.

Please reconsider

There is no question that our education system needs to be improved. However, it would not be prudent to focus on any one aspect of the system (French immersion in this case) in isolation of the other aspects. A comprehensive review, looking at all issues (French immersion, integration of special needs children, enhanced learning opportunities for more advanced students, exceptional learning support for those who need extra support, smaller student teacher ratios, classroom support, etc.) and the inter-relationships and impacts of each these on the others must be considered before any decision for change can be a truly informed decision that will lead to improvements in our educational system and thus benefit all of our students.

We must continue to offer families the choice on what is best for their children, therefore, I think it is essential to keep the early french immersion program. I recognize that something must be done in our school system to better educate our children in either language, but that will not be accomplished by simply eliminating the early french immersion program.
Here are my suggestions, Minister Lamrock;
1-Lower all classroom sizes, that alone will significantly improve learning opportunities and assessment grades.
2-continue with intensive french for all children not enrolled in EFI.
3-campaign for more children to enroll in EFI, all are welcome, no matter what learning/behavior needs they have!
4-provide opportunities for schools to link up via smartboard/webconferencing to promote more fluency/dialogue in French at the elementary/middle schools...
5-completely make over the high school french immersion system!!!
Example... each year of grades 9-12, students must take all three of the following: french literature, french communication(conversation) and french writing... which could be offered at different academic levels. If you really meant that it was your intention for all (most) children to be bilingual by the time they graduate, then offer these choices to all levels of learners....
The high school system, as it is set up now greatly diminishes students' choice of courses. They are required to take a certain number each year, to graduate with their FI certificate, but there are very few courses to choose from! That is very frustrating and unproductive, no wonder so many students drop out by the time they get to high school!
The example above would go a long way to ensure a high level of proficiency in the french language and also a way to stay connected with the culture.
If you continue on with the FI program at the high school level the way it is now, then at minimum test the students at grade 10, then allow them the freedom to choose the courses they need to get in to the post secondary programs they want!
Mr Lamrock, I understand the problems we are facing, and like you, I want to work and do whatever it takes to make our education system much more functional. I believe we must not destroy a program, and hope that it will make a difference to another...
My children ages 12,8 and 7 are in the FI program in Woodstock. They, along with my husband are Maliseet first Nations people who live on reserve. We are in no way part of an elite group or have more advantages than others.
My middle child is hearing impaired, and is on an SEP and has done very well in french, and is proud of her bilingual abilities. My family is francophone(Tracadie region) and she would have lost her connection to her heritage, if it had not been for immersion. This has happened already to her Maliseet heritage...
We all know how important language is to a culture!
Please use these next six weeks to find a way to help all kids get what they need... do the right things that should have been done long before you were Education Minister...drop the classroom size numbers, support your teachers by giving them the tools with which they need to teach, provide more opportunities to talk about what is/is not working in our schools, and encourage parents to be more accountable for their children's' education!

I support your changes you had made to our education system and I admire your courage to make these desperately needed changes. People need to realize that it is French as a SECOND language - let them learn their FIRST language FIRST!!! Then, as the FSL title says, they can learn their second language. Francophones school THEIR children in their mother tongue first, why can't the Anglophones??????? Why can't some people realize the benefit of eliminating streaming and eliminating the need to fund all the different existing programs????????? Think of how much stronger the Anglophone system could be with one program? Please go through with your original plan, Mr. Lamrock. There are MANY of us who are thrilled with your changes you want to make.

Dear Mr. Lamrock,

I am a supporter of the proposed changes which involve elimination of the existing EFI system. I have had many concerns with regard to streaming, and the generally poor comprehension and writing performance of students in the EFI program. My two eldest children are in grades 2 and 4 EFI. I do not like the plans for fifth year intensive french. After learning more at a school meeting, it seems highly unstructured and unproven.

Thanks you for your time.

I would like to express my disappointment in the Dept of Education's decision to eliminate the EFI programs in NB. The program is a good program; I went through the formative years of the program and I now make my living teaching other students to speak French.

I agree that some support for the program is necessary and that Immersion may create differentiated groups, however this is a part of life, it is unfortunate but not malicious.
There is segregation based on language, or age, or sex, or interest in drama, interest in sports, etc.. This is not a reason to eliminate a program that helps NBers to function better in our society and culture.

The results of the testing done in twelth grade is not a good indication of the students abilities. The program is meant to Immerse students in the language however beginning in the 9th grade it is all but abandoned, the percentage of hours of French instruction decreases the older the students get. Basing where or not the early years of the program are effective, makes no sense at the end of the twelth grade. Students should be tested at the end of fifth grade and those would be the most valid test results.

When the expectation of FI students reaching a certain level of ability in French is not met, the support should increase not be taken away. Do we remove Phys Ed when the childhood obesity rates increase, no we add hours? The same rules should apply.

When you say that students struggle, that is a given, some students always struggle, that does not mean the entire program should be scrapped. How would that equate to a classroom environment? Should teacher's ignore students that struggle as well because they are expriencing difficulties and are not meeting the testing standards? Absolutely not, we increase the time spent with them.

The additions of the programs mentioned at the high school level seem inadequate. Extra curricular activities are not a substitute nor a replacement for classroom learning.

Studies for decades have shown that learning a new language is easier in the early years. Leaving this learning for sixth grade is too late. Some students are less receptive to change and therefore may miss out on their opportunities.

I do agree that it is important for all students to have an understaning of basic French, however the Intensive Immersion program seems forced. It would provide a great introduction to the LFI program however does it properly consider students with learning challenges etc...

I sincerely hope that this period of discussion is taken seriously and carefully considered.

I also want to comment of the fact that 70% of students are in core french. The reason for this is because EFI is not offered in small schools in small communities in NB! There are a thousands of parents in small communites who's children are not offered french immersion in their schools. Only core french. They have no choice! Parents would enroll their children if they had the option. Most of these people are not offered high speed internet or cable television either! And we wonder why there are so many "uneducated" people in NB! EFI should be available in ALL schools in ALL communties!! Taking it away from everybody just is NOT the answer!!!

I think EFI is a wonderful program! I think the drop-out rate is so high is because when children get into high scool they are looking to prepare themselves for university. (writng essay's, reading some of best literature even written, studing history and science- biology, chemisty, physics) These courses are better taught in a childs mother tounge. So, why not have children receive their FSL certificate in say grade 9 (to reduce the drop out rate) Then learn the most importnat part of their school years in english to prepre themselves? They could still even take a 1 hour french course everyday to keep them fresh on their skills. Everybody knows a child can learn a second language better in their early years...kids are like spounges! Kids don't want to go into LFI at a time in their lifes when they are trying to find themselves. Most have low self-esteems and are looking to find their places in the world. Trying to learn a new language when every thing else in their lifes are changeing just isn't fair!!

Let me begin by saying I had been a life-long Liberal. I'm a university-educated New Brunswick resident, literacy is highly important to me and essential in my job and I venture to say I may be among the half of the province's population considered "functionally literate."

I read the minister's plan as well a couple of the previous studies on French second language. I've also read the latest PISA scores, the 2007 District 6 Report Card and Justice McLellan's decision June 11.

Completing high school 25 years ago, I didn't have an opportunity to take French immersion, but my son completes his fifth year of early immersion this year and will continue in immersion throughout future grades.

Here's my take on your plan and other education issues that must be addressed:

Intensive French - a good idea but not in the absence of any prior French instruction. I believe there should be situations where students can be opted out of Intensive French if their parents & teachers agree it will be counterproductive to their progress in English reading and writing.

Social grading - a bad idea that will certainly not work well if you intend to make Intensive French mandatory. This past year I've watched the struggles of a student in the Core French program who should never have been allowed to leave (or enter) Grade 4 the previous year with his reading troubles. I recall the sense of dread and helpless his family and others had about how their children would cope with having half their year in French and having to prepare for middle school with only half a year for the Grade 5 curriculum. Some parents hired tutors to help their children through the year, but what about those who can't afford tutors and must rely on resources the school provides? Why set students, their families and their teachers - and their classmates - up for this frustration by allowing people to progress beyond Grade 4 without a Grade 4 reading level?

Core French and Late Immersion - I don't see any major problems with these parts of your plan.

Elimination of Early French Immersion - an ill-advised and hasty decision that, regardless of the outcome now, has cost the Liberals the next election and Mr. Lamrock his political future. Consult the experts as the predecessors to this government have done. Recognize and acknowledge the value of an early foundation in a second language even if it was not carried through until Grade 12. If early immersion is the problem, why have no other provinces come up with Mr. Lamrock's solution? Why have so many language experts come out against his report? There was a graceful out and possible opportunity to recover from this mistake June 11 but Mr. Lamrock fumbled it in a way which surely embarrasses the Liberals.

Targets - Make your targets

Transparency - Justice McLellan's report pointed out a shameful lack of transparency in the education minister's announcement of the Croll-Lee report and the invitation for responses. This lack of "plain language" from a minister who publicly points out our province's low literacy scores makes him look all the more arrogant and opportunistic, using the type of spin we've come to expect from academic elitists.

As for streaming - if you're going to have inclusion, you're going to have streaming. Inclusion's impact on the classroom learning environment and school resources must be addressed if you are really committed to resolving the issue of streaming.

Targets and scores - The minister and department must refrain from hasty and dramatic hairtrigger reactions to test scores. Our province is evolving rapidly and is in the process of trying to put a second generation of immersion students into the system. The ones who graduated from early immersion are just now having children old enough to put into the early immersion system. Whether these parents carried their own immersion through to graduation is irrelevant. They've used their early immersion experience, they know its value and they want that for their children. And if you're going to talk about targets, make them consistent. All the early immersion students who passed the advanced level should also be included in the total of students who passed intermediate. Having two different targets is misleading, and if intermediate is going to be the new target, don't point to those intermediate scores in the future and say, look at the progress we've achieved. It'll likely be pretty close to what we're achieving now if you factor in all the early immersion kids who "fail" to achieve advanced but easily achieve intermediate. When the average New Brunswicker hears that few early immersion graduates achieve their target, they're not getting that important disclaimer. If Mr. Lamrock ever gets an opportunity in the future to point out the success of his new program and French proficiency scores, he must point out that prior to 2008, early immersion students were being held to a different and higher standard. That would go a long way to restoring some transparency in government communications.