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.

Mr. Graham & Mr. Lamrock,

Being a product of the Early French Immersion program I know first hand the benefits and advantages this program gives to Anglophones seeking employment in Canada's only officially bilingual province. My daughter is presently in Grade 1 EFI and is doing great. Listening to her speak, and yes she can already carry on a conversation in french, makes me thankful that my wife & I had the opportunity to enroll her in EFI and give her a head start.

The program works, there is no denying this fact. I ask that you please don not deprive my 5 year old son, heading to kindergarten this fall, of this opportunity. Intensive French Immersion was designed to compliment Late Immerson, not as a replacement for EFI, those are the words of its creators, as you are both well aware.

As far as suggestions on how to improve the program, I would offer the following:

-Make French courses mandatory in High School ie. French or French History.

-Require all EFI students to take the French Proficiency Test prior to graduating.

-Provide resources for non french speaking parents to help their children with homework, perhaps on-line resource centre or help desk.

-Consult true experts on language such as those from UNB and UdeM (you know who they are), they have alternate plans already laid out and know what they are talking about. They should not be ignored or dismissed, or simply thanked for their time.

You now have the chance to right the ship and reverse your ridiculous policy. Mr. Lamrock, now is not the time to let people know that the judge did not dispute the Gov'ts right to make this decision, it's time to do the right thing. Keep Early French Immersion, improve it and improve LFI as well.

I truly hope you keep the Children of New Brunswick in mind when you make your decision, they are our future leaders and deserve the best education available, parens deserve to be able to make a choice, not simply follow your policy.

I agree with the government's objective of integrating our English school system. I suggest that in addition to integrating French for all students from pre kindergarden to graduation we should offer Spanish as a third language in grade 9 or 10. All children should reach their maximum level of bilingualism (English and French) in our public school system.
Should parents wish an alternative; we are a free country and they are free to purchase this in an independent private school system should the demand be there to create such a private system. This is presently the case for home schooling, Christian school systems and those such as the Rothesay private school.

Both, Early and late inmersion French programs should be eliminated. French schools should be the option for parents who want their children to be educated in French.
There should only be one FSL program available at English schools. The FSL core program needs to be improved. It needs to be a strong program and taught starting in Kindergarten at English schools to ensure kids are bilingual.
The challenge for kids should not be learning a new language. Right now the only option for kids who are ahead of their class is to go into French inmersion for them to be challenged. We need to focus on the Math, English and Science curriculums and challenge kids on those areas. Learning a second language should not be made the only main concern of our schools. We need changes to ensure our kids get a good education in science which is what will get them into University.

I am a strong supporter of the announcement made to do away with early immersion by Mr. Lamrock.

As a mother or two boys ages 8 and 10, my husband and I chose to go with the English program with plans on enrolling them in late immersion in grade 6. We chose this route because it was important to us to detect any learning problems they may have and deal with them at an early age. We wanted them to have a good solid foundation on which to build their education.

I have three older sisters that had tried early immersion with their children and I saw first hand the impact it had on two out of three of them. All were very bright but two struggled and as a result, they has self-esteem issues that I feel would not have surfaced if they had not been in early immersion. I didn't want to take that chance with my children.

Both my children are very bright and are excelling in reading. Their math skills are excellent. My problem with the English program is the streaming and because of this, I don't feel my children are as educationally challenged as they could be.

Early immersion was where the "smart" kids went and the children that had "issues" ended up in English. As children started dropping out of early immersion due to their inability to adapt, the problems got worse. They were behind and more attention had to be focused on them.

I believe New Brunswickers need a better solution - one that gives all students the same opportunities.

This year my 10 year old entered into a Grade 5 Intensive French Program and he is doing well. He will be continuing in the Late Immersion program and I am confident he will be a bilingual New Brunswicker.

I urge the New Brunswick government to stick to their conviction and move as they originally planned to scrap the Early Immersion and to put every child on a level playing field. I think early years education is the prime time for children to develop not only their English Language Arts and Math skills but their social skills and self-confidence.

The Early Immersion program works but for only a small percentage. For New Brunswickers to ignore this fact, in my mind, contradicts the goal of having a larger percentage of bilingual graduates. We need to concentrate on changing the system. Yes, it may hurt some, but it will help many more.

The only suggestion I would make to the Intensive French program would be to start in Grade 4. Perhaps this would have caused less of an uproar.

I have talked with many educators and DEC representatives and they have all expressed that the original announcement of Mr. Lamrock was the way to go. Something needs to change drastically, and I am proud that our New Brunswick government realizes this and is willing to do something about it. Although the decision is not popular in some circles, it simply makes sense in mine.

Je voudrais commenter sur la décision d'éliminer le programme d'immersion précoce. Nous sommes la seule province bilingue au Canada. Comment allons-nous pouvoir garder ce statut si on ne peut pas apprendre la langue avant la 6e année? Les recherches prouvent qu'apprendre une deuxième est préférable à un jeune âge, pas à douze ans. Je suis prête à confirmer qu'il y a des problèmes dans le systéme présentement, mais on ne jète pas tout à l'eau sans essayer de le modifier ou de le réparer. Qui peut faire une décision si finale que de l'abandonner complètement? Sûrement après toutes ces années où l'enseignement d'immersion se fait, on pourrait trouver des milliers d'exemples où le programme a eu des succès. Je connais maintes personnes bilingues grâce à ce programme, y incluant mon mari.
J'étais ravie d'entendre la décision en cour la semaine passée. Je ne suis pas impressionner par la décision du ministre d'attendre un autre six semaines avant de prendre une décision finale. Que font les parents, les enseignants, les districts pour se préparer pour septembre. On le saura vers le 6 août,possiblement, trop tard pour une bonne préparation de début d'année.

The present Government's new plan to teach French in the English schools is not an Anglophone vs Francophone issue. Those who would say it is are missing the point entirely. It is being used as an opportunity to open debate on an issue that was decided a long time ago. It sets me off when I see inflammatory headlines and hear morning radio personalities going on & on about how much this decision has opened old wounds and sparked tensions.pleeease enough already with the drama!
Years ago, the government of the day declared this province an official bilingual province - that was a fair & just decision. Their intention in doing so was to give equal rights/equal access to services to both major linguistic groups in this province. We are fortunate to live in a peaceful land where these rights are respected & upheld by the law.
However, they did not decree all people in the province learn both official languages. Justice Hugh McLennan's ruling clarifies this by rejecting the notion that language training is protected by the Charter - it is not. We all have a right to good, well-rounded education in all aspects - Math, English, Science, Art, English & French etc. It is not a "right" for Anglophone parents to expect taxpayers to cover the cost of teaching a small percentage of English students the French language, while the majority of English students are left behind with substandard education and resources. (Speaking French sans accent should never enter into the debate if people are to be taken seriously and not accused of being "elitist") At some point, we have to take responsibility to further our own education using the tools we acquire in the school system and if these tools are not adequate, then our future successes are questionable. Being bilingual, although clearly an asset in some workplaces, does not guarantee success. On the other hand, being marginally literate in your mother tongue has serious, far-reaching, consequences. The policies of the Minister of Education should reflect concern & consideration for the education of all students. It has been obvious for quite some time that something needed to be done with the English education platform. Kelly Lamrock & our present government have dealt with the problem directly and made a decision, knowing it would meet with lively debate & strenuous opposition. Justice McLennan's ruling also instructed the government to consult further with the public and give more time to those who may have better ideas to improve our floundering education system. This is an example of democracy working. Some have expressed skepticism and this will not affect the outcome. To them, I say get busy with a viable idea for an alternative because we cannot go backwards. Parents who are adamant their child(ren) become bilingual can independently ensure that this happens no matter how it is delivered in the classroom - as for the rest of us, some of our children will be successful in learning the language under a new system. The ultimate goal is for the student population, as a whole, to be treated fairly, with equal access to a better, more balanced, education.

Hello,

I am currently a university student studying Chemistry at Université de Moncton. I am a graduate of Early French Immersion and I feel that the program has helped me immensely in life. After having applied to Université de Moncton I wrote a placement test to see if I needed to do the bridging program for anglophone students, fortunately, thanks to the Early French Immersion program I had obtained the skills necessary to enter into the normal program for francophone students at the University.

My father was a primary and elementary teacher for 30 years and he also thinks that the decision to scrap Early French Immersion is outrageous. We have had numerous discussions on the topic and we do not feel that taking away a LANGUAGE program will help increase performance in areas of Science and Mathematics. In order for there to be an increase in performance in the math and Science areas, the province of New Brunswick should look into taking measure similar to those taken by the Newfoundland and Labrador provincial government. The government of Newfoundland and Labrador has implemented teaching support positions for mathematics at the primary level. Students need much more practice in Math and Science but taking away a language program will not help in any way shape or form.

I firmly believe that students need to have the opportunity to learn a second language from a young age. My parents will tell anyone that asks them that it was not their decision to place me in early immersion but mine. Yes, at the age of 4 I decided that I wanted to be an Early Immersion student. I will also say that my marks in mathematics and in the sciences were never affected by the immersion program. If anything, my marks in mathematics and science were made better because of the immersion program and the need to learn more material.

Thank you for reading

I am speaking as both a parent of two children who went through the early Immersion program, and as a teacher who has taught in the public school system for 23 years. I have to say I was excited when I heard about the proposed changes to the French Immersion program. I have taught both Core French and Immersion students and have witnessed the streaming effect for many years. The parents who so vehemently oppose any changes have obviously not seen the negative effects on the majority of our students. It is unjust that a typical French Immersion class has only 14-18 students, with only 2 or 3 struggling students, whereas across the hall, the teacher of a Core French classroom has 24-30 students, with possibly half of those students in modified or accomodated programs- not to mention those with severe behavior problems. Furthermore, although the French Immersion parents are making quite a noise; that is not to say that many parents, who perhaps are not as comfortable in voicing their opinions, don't support the proposed changes. As a parent of 2 grown children, who were both strong students and actually completed the entire French Immersion program, I have had several conversations with them on this very topic. Both of them feel that there was little, if any difference between their French, and the French of their friends who entered Late Immersion. The degree of one's bilingualism depends on the desire of that person to become bilingual. No student can become truly bilingual through any Immersion program taught in public school- further study at a French university or through an exchange program is necessary to attain this goal. Neverthless, it is evident to me that French Immersion parents are not even willing to listen to arguments supporting change. They have closed their ears and their minds. As a result, a compromise will need to be struck. I propose that Immersion be offered in grade 4. That way, the students will have the prime K-3 years to master literacy and numeracy and ALL students will have the opportunity to meet their full potential. We've known that the current system hasn't worked for many years. It's about time someone stepped up to the plate and tried to fix some of the problems.

I personally disagree with the NB Education's Minister decision to elimate French emmersion fron NB schools biginning in grade one and moving it to total French emersion starting in Grade five.
I personally believe the parent(s) should have a choice whether their child should be enrolled in bilingual language training beginning in grade one or not.
I recommend the french emmersion training in NB schools should not be changed to the system the Minister has suggested and it remains the the way it always have been.
With the recommendation more resources be made available to the NB Education Department to make it happen. i.e. with more Dollars and Teaching postions to provide the service to NB's children.

I want to know how you expect children, who have never been exposed to French to go into an Intensive French program in Grade Five....This would be a wonderful program if the core French was still be offered in the earlier grades.

I am in full support of the new program for French Second Language Program. It is obvious that the exsisting system is not working for a majority of our students. Our young people need a good basis in their mother tongue in their early years.

I am a teacher of Grade 9 and 10 Core French and I am also an EFI graduate. I have direct experience with both programs as a student and now as a teacher. I can see what does work and what doesn't.

It has been said over and over that eliminating the program that aims for the highest proficiency is not the solution to our problems. EFI is not the reason our literacy and numeracy scores are so low, and I'm not sure how EFI came to be the scapegoat for this problem.

I am 100% behind the minister in adopting an Intensive French program in grade 5, but not at the expense of EFI. I've attended meetings with Joan Netten as a speaker, and even she admits IF is not meant to replace EFI. Also, it's important to keep in mind that all the pilot projects with IF have been conducted among students who have already had 4 years of previous exposure to French. How can we possibly use IF without testing it the way we intend to use it...with no previous exposure to French? At least pilot it as such if that's the actual way it will be implemented in the future. It's just common sense.

The Core program is failing. Adding IF is exactly the kind of boost this current program needs to succeed. EFI is also failing in that it is seemingly not accessible for struggling students. For some reason, many have said "adding money and resources into FI" is not a proper or realistic solution to retain a larger number of students in the program. Why isn't it? I'd be willing to train in Methods and Resources. Has anyone even investigated whether this actually could work- training FSL teachers in Methods and Resource..even to have at least one bilingual M&R teacher in a school?

When it is all said and done, aiming for Intermediate is placing the bar too low. This is not what many would consider "proficient" in French. In today's market, that level of proficieny is considered poor. It would almost be a waste of time for students to spend eight years only to end with such a low proficiency. We may reach the 70% target of "bilingual" students, but only because we lowered the bar.

By lowering the bar, and taking away an enrichment opportunity from students by eliminating EFI, we are not sending a good message as educators. I understand we need to look out for the best interest of all students, but eliminating EFI is not going to do one ounce of good for our struggling learners, it's only going to take away an opportunity for many students.

Fixing the problems in core English should not come at the expense of a working early French Immersion program.

As a grade 9 and 12 French Language Arts teacher I've seen the grade 9 English Language Provincial Assessment for reading and writing. In an English class, almost half the class either failed one or both assessment. In early immersion you would have 4 or 5 failing one or both. With the intermediate immersion you have 1 or none failing one or both assessment.
It's well published that in the province of New Brunswick our students are low in reading and writing. What I don't understand is why does our government want to increase the number of students that our low? Instead of taking away Early French Immersion, why don't they fix what's wrong in the English program, as in bringing back grammar to classes. Some students can't identify a subject or verb in a phrase and this happens in both languages. This is happening in grade 9. Bring grammar back! Group projects are nice, but come on; there's must be a limit to it.
Teachers need support! Why doesn't the government give more funding on resources; as in teachers aide?

Also, once the students leave high school, the amount of them that retain the French language in Intermediate French is very low compared to the Early Immersions who have been speaking French since the age of 6. After 2 years of University, my Intermediate French immersion students that I meet again, hardly speak French. Most of them will decline in speaking French to me because they feel uncomfortable or have forgotten it all together. That is hardly the case with my Early French immersions students. Are we or not a bilingual provincial? Are we lowering the bare when it comes to oral French speaking? In grade 12, each student taking French must go through an oral evaluation. Most of the Early Immersion students get either Advance or Advance Plus. With the new change we're going to get, we won't be seeing that anymore. It will be either Intermediate or Intermediate Plus. Does oral communication in both languages important? It seems to me the answer with what's going to happen is no. So be prepared to have New Brunswick changed from a bilingual province to and English one! Because that's exactly what's going to happen.

As a trained Educator in Intensive French and a French Immersion Teacher in N.B. and Manitoba through the last 16 years, I feel that Early French Immersion should not be illiminated. I firmly believe that entry points for FI should remain at the Grade 1 and 6 levels. I also believe that the Core French program should be replaced with the Intensive French Program at Grade 5. I also strongly suggest that ALL teachers of French Immersion be trained in the same methodology as the Intensive French Model. This program and implementing the same methods would improve the whole FSL system. Parents should have the choice to enroll their children in FI in the only Bilingual province in Canada and if we eliminate the program we are falling further behind the other provinces and going back in time instead of moving forward. In countless discussions with collegues and friends I have proposed the above and they are all supportive of this alternative option. With Early FI in place and new EXCELLENT Intensive French program we would see a huge jump in our FSL students test scores and the numbers graduating from HIgh School from the FI program. The reason that the majority of FI students do not continue to study FI through High School is because the courses they need for University are not offered in French. They have to drop French to get the credits they want and need. We need to offer these courses in French to Immersion and Post Intensive Students if we are truly Putting Children First. Thank you.

From the department enrolment data, over 70% of NB students have access to Early French Immersion. In fact there are 8 of our smaller cites that have over 50% of the student in EFI Only in New Brunswick is there not early French Immersion Kindergarten and no assistance for any child who experiences a learning challenge. Only in New Brunswick is there no teacher training institute for FSL education for Anglophones It is as if New Brunswick has worked hard to make sure the program was weaker here and students had to leave or were forced to leave the program to receive any help which created the streaming This streaming does not exist in Alberta, Manitoba or BC. This appears to have been a deliberate move on the part of ministerial officials over many years, It may indeed be a defensive reaction on the part of the Anglophone sector. I can't help but wonder what will happen to the Canadian Heritage dollars poured into this province (almost 24,000,000 a year) for minority language education- most of which the New Brunswick government has directed to the francophone sector for the past 20 years which starved the EFII program. If the amounts remain stable with fewer students in FSL education (none form Grade 1-4) the francophone population who now receives over 80% of that funding will get even more of that 24,000,000.

With the current FSL plan, in 11 years no Anglophone graduate could meet the requirements of the largest majority of civil service jobs as the late immersion only delivers an intermediate level of linguistic competency. If parents are able to afford sending their children on a Quebec or France exchange there might be some advanced level students from that group. A very few strong academic and motivated students from late immersion may also achieve the level required. But 90 + percent will be unable to meet any acceptable standard, The current 42 % of early immersion students meeting that standard will look good.
In today's world and to have the best opportunities for global participation, more than one language needs to be the standard, Kelly has misguidedly chosen an option that will not deliver what he espouses. There are many positive initiatives that are occurring in elementary education that will assist NB to achieve the improved international scores. I commend those. The decision to implement an intensive French component in the Core French program which will occur over the next three years will improve the Core French program and allow rural children access to a better program than they have had. This has been proven in Newfoundland where the program was developed and has been in place for over 5 years.

All the positive initiatives will not overcome the ultimate outcome of this single decision which is fewer bilingual Anglophones and disadvantaged graduates in the global and national community. The cognitive benefits of early bilingualism will be lost to New Brunswick children while a province like Alberta expands their number of early immersion programs to French, Spanish, Mandarin, Japanese in their attempts to become a participant on the international scene. BC's immersion numbers increase by over 6% a year, many of the children from immigrant families whose children are learning a third or fourth language.

This decision will likely be overturned by another government as the data comes in over the next 5-12 years that shows fewer children in immersion in Grades 7-12, an even more streamed middle years and high school groupings than existed in early immersion.

My husband and I moved to New Brunswick almost 2 years ago to raise our family. We had visited here and found the province very beautiful and certainly more affordable for a family than Alberta. In Calgary, we heard the public relations of Premier. Lord and Premier. Graham to come to New Brunswick. We were willing to accept the lower salary for a better life for our children and ourselves

I graduated from early French Immersion in western Canada and have enjoyed many advantages during travel, in employment opportunities and in friendships made with Canadians of francophone descent. My husband was also involved in bilingual education though with Ukrainian as a second language.

Since Early French Immersion exists in every province in Canada I never thought to be concerned with this program option's availability in New Brunswick when my husband and I were making our decision to relocate here.

I still cannot believe that this province will follow through with such a poor decision as the elimination of early French Immersion and rob Anglophone children of the opportunity to achieve an advanced level of bilingualism. I have followed the debate over the past two months and have refused to lose hope that saner minds would prevail in this province. How can French Immersion be so successful in western Canada with the greatest % increase occurring in BC and Alberta.and determined to be such a failure in New Brusnwick?

There are other options that can address the challenges Minister. Lamrock has identified as his more urgent priorities.

I do not want to uproot my family again but one of the most important parent responsibilities is to ensure their children's education. The cognitive benefits of early second language learning, the English language benefits, the opportunities for learning a different culture, the travel and employment benefits of a second language all matter to me as a parent. I cannot take that away from my children.

Mr. Lamrock, your plan is not going to deliver what I want for my children nor will it deliver what you say it will. My children are my first responsibility. Take the time for consultation with the prime stakeholders in children's education- the parents- and allow for processes to find solutions amenable to all.

I am opposed to the cancellation of Early French Immersion.

I suggest that the NB Department of Education adopt Dr. Dicks' education plan, his approach to education is based on sound research, actual facts and years of research. Intensive French for all in grade 5 is NOT and I am not willing to jeopardize my child's education and future on Minister Lamrocks' unqualified opinion of what her education should be.

My daughter is currently enrolled in the Early French Immersion program in St. George Elementary and if it were to be cancelled I will be forced to transfered my child to a french school in St. John, over 1 hour of travel each way on sometimes unsafe road conditions. This is unfair to my child and will in the end be costly to tax payers, and the Department of Education as I believe your department will be liable for her travel expenses and her safety during travel.

I am very happy that my son, who will be entering Grade One next Fall, will not be segregated from his kindergarten friends based on the arcane (and provincial in every way) language policies of New Brunswick.

I am a parent who disagrees that the primary driving force of our education system should be a 70% bilingualism goal. The dismissive touch this policy gives to first-language literacy, math and science proficiencies and the projected workforce needs of this province is insulting. Until we drop this as cornerstone of the New Brunswick Education system, not only will our ranking in International testing continue to drop, the gap between New Brunswick graduates and other jurisdictions will widen appreciably. We are a small, resource weak province and must focus our energy on creating a competent (not world class) knowledge-based workforce. We need realistic goals with practical strategies.