Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

macleans.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 45 posts

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#11

Post by soperj »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #9
hamstercat wrote: post #6

It's funny, because the reverse issue exists within Quebec. I can't say how much better (or worse) it got recently recently, but I know that 15 years ago English classes in primary and high school were very, very underwhelming. I'm lucky enough that my school had an advanced curriculum available, but I have friends that didn't have this chance and even today they wouldn't be able to have a basic conversion in English…

Youth is the best time to learn new languages too, they're harder to acquire later in life for some reason.

I've learned 4 languages now. English - only language my parents spoke. French - did French Immersion Finnish - spent time in Finland in my teens and learned the language German - just started picking it up 3 years ago

The main difference I see is 2 things, time & immersion. I know less German after 3 years than I did through French Immersion, but I've spent way less time doing it, never had any formal instruction, and haven't spent 7 hours every week day having to talk and listen to German. I know more German than Finnish though, simply because I didn't spend as much effort actually learning Finnish, it all came from immersion.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#12

Post by dmckeon »

Shebanator wrote: post #7
dmckeon wrote: post #5

For a USA-ian, it is interesting to see similar issues for language immersion (in Canada) and US voucher-based charter schools, each relative to the local traditional schools, with a tendency for students from higher-income families to attend immersion (in Canada) or voucher-based charter schools (in the US), and for traditional schools to retain students from lower-income families, allophone/ESL students, and a high…

FWIW, not all immersion programs in the US are charter based. Our kids went to a public non-charter Spanish immersion school K-8 here in San Jose, and entry into the school was split equally between native English and native Spanish speakers. That meant there was good diversity in socio-economic backgrounds without any direct "racial profiling". (Note there were also some upper-income native Spanish speakers in the p…

Sorry, I did not intend to conflate immersion with charter (and voucher) in the US, and have edited to reflect that.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#13

Post by diego_moita »

This article is so wrong :

* scarcity of French immersion programs are not widespread in Canada. In Edmonton, AB, there are enough vacancies for the interested.

* the article confuses correlation and causality. French immersion students get better grades. But the simple fact that their parents want them in these programs are an indicator that these parents take more care and attention on education. And these parents care is, by itself, an important reason for better grades.

* if so many parents want it and there are clear reasons to believe they're good for the children (better pay) and for the country (strengthen the cultural identity) then the problem is that there are so few, not that they shouldn't exist.

Better say: "oui, nous voulons beaucoup!"

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#14

Post by ashark »

Romanulus wrote: post #8
en4bz wrote: post #4

Just a warning to readers that MacLean's is fairly anti-french/Quebec so take this article with a grain of salt. It also glosses over the main issue which is streaming. If a group of children is smarter than their peers is it right to force them to learn at the same pace as their slower peers and vice-versa. French immersion in English speaking Canada is a streaming tool to get around the fact that classes are not st…

Taken from Wikipedia: "Since lower socioeconomic groups and children with learning and behavioral problems have lower rates of participation in French immersion, a situation has developed in which ambitious families might prefer French immersion for its effective streaming than for the bilingual skills it gives to students." I don't see how this is a problem, as you've noted it.

This kind of thing happens everywhere. Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability and lower disruptiveness in the student body. You're purchasing good peers for your kids when you buy/rent housing in a good district, above all else.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#15

Post by dragonwriter »

ashark wrote: post #14
Romanulus wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taken from Wikipedia: "Since lower socioeconomic groups and children with learning and behavioral problems have lower rates of participation in French immersion, a situation has developed in which ambitious families might prefer French immersion for its effective streaming than for the bilingual skills it gives to students." I don't see how this is a problem, as you've noted it.

This kind of thing happens everywhere. Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability and lower disruptiveness in the student body. You're purchasing good peers…

> Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability

Good school districts are generally good because they have a higher proportion of students with educated parents who can positively model intellectual engagement, and provide educational opportunities and resources.

It's not necessarily that the reachability of the students is better any more that the teaching is better, it's that the students in those districts are likely to be both being taught and learning independently outside of school, which gives better results.

Better school districts don't make your kid perform better, so much as your ability to afford to get into a better school district is correlated with features which would result in your kid doing better anywhere.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#16

Post by joshaidan »

I was enrolled in the French Immersion program. At my school, we had both English and French programs. One of my memories of being in French Immersion, which is likely of relevance to this article, is that I remember in the 7th and 8th grade one of my teachers (who was also the vice-principal) was concerned about the segregation between the students in the French program and the students in the English program. i.e. During recess the students French program wouldn't play with the students in the English program, vice versa. We may have had a name for students in the English program--but I can't remember it now.

The segregation in the older years wasn't as strong as younger years, but it still existed.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#17

Post by kolanos »

I attended two French Immersion schools in B.C. between 1988-1996 and this article doesn't line up at all with my (admittedly anecdotal) experience.

I'm not your typical French Immersion defender, I hated French Immersion as a kid. I attended hybrid schools where only maybe 1/4th of the school was French Immersion and the rest were English and it made me and my French classmates targets for bullying. The parents of the English students, for whatever reason, didn't want French Immersion in their schools and as such there was a lot of resentment passed down. It wasn't unusual for me to have to fight my way home, being outnumbered 3-to-1 by English students who didn't want French kids in their school. Maybe they thought it was elitist, but that couldn't be further from what I observed.

I was raised in a middle-to-lower class household, the only reason I was in French Immersion was my mother was a Quebecois transplant and didn't want me to loose touch with the French-Canadian side of my family. Most of my French classmates were also on the lower end of the income spectrum, with only a few exceptions.

I never saw it as an economic issue. If anything, the biggest differentiator between the English and French kids was the involvement of their parents in their school activities. The Parent-Teacher events by the French Immersion parents were typically packed, whereas the English PT events were sparsely attended, regardless of income levels. It just seemed like the French Immersion parents took a more engaged approach to their children's education and participation in French Immersion was more correlation than causation.

I have no doubt that there are highly sought after public schools with waiting lists and such. But if anyone thinks there's some special treatment for the French Immersion students in Western Canada, then they clearly have only looked into it on the most superficial levels or have an anti-French bias. The special treatment is you have to do every class in French (except English class) and you get beat up for the privilege.

I guess parents who care about their children's education are elitist. How dare they.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#18

Post by KZeillmann »

ashark wrote: post #14
Romanulus wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taken from Wikipedia: "Since lower socioeconomic groups and children with learning and behavioral problems have lower rates of participation in French immersion, a situation has developed in which ambitious families might prefer French immersion for its effective streaming than for the bilingual skills it gives to students." I don't see how this is a problem, as you've noted it.

This kind of thing happens everywhere. Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability and lower disruptiveness in the student body. You're purchasing good peers…

Except that good school districts usually are better funded because they're paid for with property taxes.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#19

Post by russellbeattie »

dmckeon wrote: post #5

For a USA-ian, it is interesting to see similar issues for language immersion (in Canada) and US voucher-based charter schools, each relative to the local traditional schools, with a tendency for students from higher-income families to attend immersion (in Canada) or voucher-based charter schools (in the US), and for traditional schools to retain students from lower-income families, allophone/ESL students, and a high…

The United States of America declared independence in 1776, becoming the first independent, foreign-recognized nation in the Americas. This is why we are called "Americans", despite the many subsequent independent countries also residing in the Americas. Every country has a unique name for their nationality, that is ours.

Re: Just say ‘non’: The problem with French immersion (2015)

#20

Post by ashark »

dragonwriter wrote: post #15
ashark wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of thing happens everywhere. Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability and lower disruptiveness in the student body. You're purchasing good peers…

> Good school districts in the US aren't usually good because they're better funded or because the teachers are really amazing (those things may or may not be true) but because a variety of factors (including housing costs, commutes poorly served by public transit) result in much higher average teachability Good school districts are generally good because they have a higher proportion of students with educated parent…

Being educated in classrooms where there aren't constant severe disruptions, where there's a much lower chance your kid will fall in with a crowd so bad that they end up in jail, where a higher percentage of their peers all expect/are expected to attend college, and so on, absolutely improves your child's educational (and other) prospects. Peers matter a ton. By high school peer expectations to study and maintain a certain level of academic seriousness will be 100x more effective than anything a parent can do or say—and so would peer behavior and attitudes going the other direction.

But yes, the kids are better (less disruptive, more teachable) peers mostly due to their home lives.

Post reply on HN