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. Lamrock,
I applaud your decision to finally make some changes to our education system. As an elementary school teacher and as a parent, I feel that something needed to be done. I am so glad that our union is encouraging us to speak out on this matter.
In one of the earlier comments on this site, a parent asked what the issue of streaming really is. Although I could not tell you about stats or studies, I can tell you that from the front line, in an elementary school, it looks something like this in grade one:
Two small (likely 16 or less) French immersion classes that would never be made into combined classes. No children on special education plans. Likely no children in foster care. Likely no children identified with ADHD or other behaviour problems.
Two large (likely close to max of 22) English classes where one could very likely be made into a K/1 or 1/2 combined class. Average of five special education plans. At least a couple of children who are not identified with a disability but struggling none the less. A couple who are either involved with social services or in foster care. A few with ADHD.
Nothing is more frustrating than trying to deal with all of those issues. And you don't very often get a teachers assistant unless you have a child with a really severe need.
Another comment suggested that there is less time dedicated to French literacy support teachers than to English. Also, less R&M teachers in French than in English. This is the case because of the nature of the class make-ups. There are more children who need help in the core stream than in the immersion stream.
Although my children did very well in school, I chose to put them in the core stream and enroll them in late immersion. I, myself am a late immersion graduate and through study after graduating, was able to get my proficiency to teach French immersion.
I believe that regardless of the program the children take, it is what you do with it after you graduate that makes the difference. I would like to know how many early immersion vs. late immersion graduates actually go on and take any further training or receive employment in French.
My last hope is that parents who made the decision to not enroll their children in French immersion take the opportunity to speak out. Our local media has been dominated by French Immersion parents. It sickens me that Canadian Parents for French has been scripting things for parents to say and e-mailing it out to their members. This is ridiculous. People should be voicing their own opinions not opinions that have been given to them to repeat.
I hope that you are given the support you need to continue on with making these necessary changes to our system.

Dear Mr Lamrock;
Thank you for your courage under fire.The parents who are giving you such a hard time really only want their children to keep having a private school education at the rest of the children's expense.Our sons did not go into immersion and their classes were huge,consisting of brilliant students,average students,special needs students,physically challenged students and often mainly males.Their teachers were amazing in the face of all this chaos.So many people could not understand why we would put our sons in a class with so many problems,more or less implying that we were too good for the type of people that they would come in contact with.I think they would have missed out on getting to know a lot of great people if we had taken their advice!I hope you stick to your plan to help everyone ,not just the so called elite.Thank you.

To whom it may concern:

I completely agree with the Minister's decision and believe that the elimination of EFI will put New Brunswick students on the right path to becoming educated individuals. I am a recent high school graduate and have noticed over the years the deficiencies of students who took EFI (I took late FI for a few years). Their spelling and literacy is questionable in their native English and the late immersion students showed better results in their own language, English. As for the French side, by Grade 9, they are all merged into one group and no difference is noticeable (3 years of FI vs. 8)in their level of French.

If the report proves what I have noticed throughout school and the action to cut EFI is a means to curb these problems, then go ahead and eliminate EFI.

I believe that the vocal opposition to your move was made by parents over convinced that their child can learn (well speak) two languages and be successful (and NOT care about anyone but their own child). I believe what they are doing is selfish, idealistic, and that their opinions are poorly formed. Not to mention their legal actions (Charter argument) were completely frivolous and show off the true lack of knowledge on their own part about the way Government works (Why let THEM tell us how to run an education system, when they don't seem to be educated themselves on the role of Government and interpretation of laws).

Also, reversing this decision would be a bad idea this late into the game. From what I have heard from educators, new programmes have been already designed for the Fall without EFI and having the grade five intensive French. Since your original decision has already been acted on (and no one lost their job either!), then allow the elimination to continue as planned.

First, I would like to stress that I can only speak about what I personally have seen and think. I graduated in NB having gone through the Early Immersion program from grades 1 to 11. I dropped out in grade 11 from the French Immersion program. I feel that my English suffered some from the focus on my French studies in the early grades. I now have two boys, one about to start kindergarden and one about to go into grade one. Having looked at the data that the Frank L Bowser school presented one evening on the options of Early Immersion or Intensive Immersion, I was quite impressed with the Intensive program. At Frank L Bowser they have a pilot project of grade 4 and 5 in Intensive Immersion and I thought their results were wonderful. I spoke with other parents who had themselves gone thru the French Immersion program themselves and they too felt that their english suffered. I also spoke with people from Europe where they learn their 2nd language beginning in grade 5, much similar to the Government's proposal. I believe the Intensive French makes sense for my child. The other thing I would recommend is to have two year's of intensive french, grades 4 and 5.

When I first heard of the decision to cut the FI program at grade 1 I intended to write to voice my support in the decision, however I did not take the time to do so. Now, I am compelled to let my voice be heard.

I am very much in favour of decisions that are made based on facts and research rather than on emotion. Many people have argued that FI at grade 1 is successful but where is the research to support it. There have been many personal stories but that is where emotion comes in.

I am very impressed that this government would make a decision based on research, on what is best for all students in New Brunswick rather than for political reasons as has been the trend in the past.

To the Minister I would say, "Please keep up the good work and do not let a minority of vocal people manipulate you into making a decision that you know, based on research, is not most beneficial for all students in New Brunswick schools!"

Mr. Lamrock,
New Brunswick claims it is a bilingual province; this
claim is false and misleading. The easiest way for the province to become bilingual is to teach both official languages to its residents starting at an early age. English speaking students should be required to attend Early French Immersion starting in Kindergarten or Grade 1 and ending in Grade 12, with emphasis given to Enlish composition and grammer. French speaking students
should be required to attend Early English Immersion and follow the same path as the EFI, with emphasis on French composition and grammer.
There would be no separate Enlish or French schools. The students would attend the school nearest their home. English students would attend EFI classes and French students would attend EEI classes. Cultures are blended not segretated.
Following this plan, in 12- 13 years, the province would have its first generation of 'bilingual' residents.
It has been proven, I can give personal examples, that children learn languages at a very early age.
My two children graduated from EFI, her father nor I could speak a word of French, they achieved marks in the high 80's and low 90's. Today they are in Univeristy where one majored in French. They are proud of being able to speak both languages and because of this have been able to make friends in New Brunswick without a language barrier.
Thank you for reading this long email, and I hope you will consider my suggestions. In any case my vote is for early French immersion.

I firmly believe the Minister's plan to eliminate early French Immersion is a good one. I think we should focus our early education on mother tongue literacy and Math (also taught in English). I think the Intensive French program for all is an excellent idea. I learned to speak French when I was 13 years old and I now hold a very good paying job where bilingualism is required. I function extremely well. I think language acquisition is as much about attitude and environment as it is about the age at which it was learned. As a parent of two young children I want them to be in the best possible educational setting. I also want them to receive their early instruction in English, but I do not want to have them streamed into a "have-not" class. I hope the Minister will stand firm on this very courageous decision.