It's like the PM wants everybody to learn hockey, but nobody can skate until Grade 5
Education two U de M and 21 unB professors bash croll-Lee report
MONCTON - A pair of Université de Moncton professors are challenging the education minister to subject the French second-language program to an expert review, just as 21 UNB professors finish addressing a letter to Ombudsman Bernard Richard, complaining the supporting data analysis of the program is incorrect.
The report could “affect the credibility of all social research,” said Jimmy Bourque, director of the Centre for Research and Development in Education on Monday.
“It’s amazing. These are their statistics … yet they say the late-immersion program is clearly better than the early-immersion program,”Bourque said.
He said the government may argue that more late-immersion students hit a “target” level of proficiency, but that target is lower than the one for early immersion.
“It’s like comparing two ho ckey leagues: the NHL and a peewee league,’’ Bourque said. “The performance level in peewee might be skating five strideswithout falling, and in the NHL it’s skating around the rink in so many seconds.
“If the peewees obtain their objective more often, are they better?” Bourque joined Rodrigue Landry, director of the Canadian Institute for Research on Linguistic Minorities, in lambasting the methodology in the $180,000 Croll-Lee review of French second-language programs. For more than an hour, they presented slides in both official languages.
Using the report’s own statistics, they argued its presentation is biased, its reasoning flawed and its conclusions misleading.
Compared to those who begin immersion in Grade 6, roughly four times as many early-immersion students achieve an advanced proficiency level in French, Bourque said.
Bourque and Landry also argue that there is not enough evidence to support repolacing early immersion with an intensive Grade 5 program.
“It’s like the prime minister wants everybody to learn hockey, but nobody can skate until Grade 5,” Landry said.“You’ll be able to play at some intermediate level, but all those kids who would have liked to play hockey at age three or four, who would be in elite leagues, are no longer there.
“Excellence is not an option.”
The report by Jim Croll and Patricia Lee also received flack on Monday from 21 professors in the math and statistics department at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton. The instructors, all PhDs, have written a letter to Ombudsman Bernard Richard, complaining that the data analysis is incorrect, and that there is little evidence to support the recommendations.
The professors decided not to take a position on the elimination of French immersion itself, only to study the numbers presented in the report. The program is scheduled to be replaced this fall.
For the most part, the recommendation can not be justified, said Maureen Tingley, the director of UNB’s Applied Statistics Centre.
“After hearing all the silly logic we’ve been listening to, we decided to take a look at the report ourselves,” Tingley said.“After looking at the statistical analysis, everyone agrees the numbers are being manipulated in crazy ways.”
Tingley sent an e-mail to Lamrock expressing frustration with the inaccuracies the group found within the report.
“If grammatical errors had matched the numeric errors in the report, nobody would have given the report a second thought,’’ Tingley wrote. She said the minister did not respond.
“As a group, we are now very upset,’’ Tingley said of the PhDs. “This has really gotten under our skin. There are numerical issues and logical issues. Looking at the data, you can’t figure out where about half of the recommendations come from.”
According to the group, a subsequent analysis undertaken by UNB researchers Matthew Litvak and D.J. Hamilton refute much of what is in the Croll-Lee report.
Litvak and Hamilton’s research shows that the government’s plan will not significantly reduce the number of specialneeds students that are being streamed into immersion courses.
Depending on the way numbers are rounded, the government approach will remove only one or two special-needs students from each classroom, Litvak and Hamilton found.
“It is not hard to criticize the government report,” said Colin Ingalls, a UNB professor who helped organize the project for the group of 21 PhDs. “Some of the recommendations don’t seem to have much to do with material in the report “It is unclear how the recommendations and the data connect to one another.”
More Actualités
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
Comments (142)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
My question would be, to this pair of professors. How many graduates from the English schools system attend UdeM for post secondary training? I expect few, if any, because they would not be proficient enough in french to survive or even be accepted.
The system flunks and until the PARENTS of FSL offer up some alternative, the government has made the best decision for the children of NB.
The emperor has no clothes..or in this case the early immersion helps a few at the expense of the many....
As a parent with children in the school system I don't disagree that there are problems with the system. It's working great for my children but others may not have my experience. I would argue that it is not the responsibility of PARENTS to come up with solutions but the responsibility of the Dept. of Education to do so. And in doing so they should rely on recommenadations made by experts - recommendations based on sound research and analysis - neither of which is the case in the Croll/Lee report.
And as for the question of too much French? That is not the issue. The issue is implementing this across the board taking away parents' right to choice.
I invite you to read the Croll/Lee report http://www.gnb.ca/0000/publications/comm/FSL%20Report.pdf as well as the review of it that points out the inaccuracies (http://hamlit2008.googlepages.com/)
btw a solution developed by experts was presented in the form of the Rehorick Report .. they didn't like that one
Universite de Moncton has a bridge programme for immersion students which is very successful. They can study in whichever Faculty they choose. The U de M law school has graduated anglophone lawyers. There is public outrage because numerous immersion grads use their French in their current postions. Students even use it in their part-time jobs. Trust me, I have seen this success first-hand.
The Croll-Lee report is flawed and self-serving. Period.
Immersion teacher
If you don't know what you're talking about, I suggest you stop talking out of your ass.
From the responses from anglo grads of U de M, it seems you don't know what you're talking about. No great surprise here.
D. Breezes, you have no idea what you are talking about but I'm sure that won't be an impediment to your continued posting of lies and myths on these forums.
Before any of you throw out they shouldn't have to brige gaps, imagine how difficult and intimidating it might be to try to study at Oxford University (in English) or at a University in Germany or Spain and then consider how a bridging program could help a student intent on doing so.
With this bridging program at U de M, the Immersion graduate fully integrates their studies in whatever discipline they choose and increases their bilingualism in the process.
Bilingualism is a lifelong process and project, it doesn't end at grade 12 graduation. EFI will give you the best chance of reaching the highest levels of proficiency, and we all benefit from that. U de M and its program for anglophones is one great piece of that puzzle.