Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

14 comment(s)

The New Brunswick government has been criticized for basing its decision to eliminate early French immersion on research that is inadequate and flawed. Claims that a single system will help close the gap in academic performance between New Brunswick students and those in other provinces have been questioned. Concerned parents have accused the government of using their children as guinea pigs in a grand social experiment with uncertain consequences.

If the government is going to press ahead with its plan, it should at least take advantage of an opportunity afforded by social experiments of this kind: to carry out research that can definitively determine whether early immersion is responsible for the poor academic results of New Brunswick students.

The main benefit the government anticipates from scrapping early immersion is the elimination of streaming. Students on the English side will benefit as there will no longer be a disproportionate number of children with learning difficulties in those classrooms.

To support its claims, the government points to research showing that countries without streaming in their education systems tend to perform better in standardized international testing.

A more rigorous way to assess the effects of early immersion on students in the English program would be to compare results here in New Brunswick before and after elimination of the program. 'Before' means now: there needs to be a baseline measurement of basic literacy and numeracy skills in a representative sampling of grade-one students in the English program in schools across the province prior to the end of this school year. 'After' means as soon as benefits from the change are anticipated. Presumably this would be in the spring of 2009, when the first group of grade-one students will have spent a year in the new system and should already be demonstrating improved results.

Care would be needed in drawing comparisons based on such testing. The 'after' results cannot include all grade one students in 2009 because this group will not be comparable to the English stream students of 2008: it will include students who would have been in early French immersion if the program were still in place. The comparison that matters (from the standpoint of rigorous research) is between English stream students of 2008 and those who would have been in the English stream in 2009.

As luck would have it, the late timing of the government's decision makes this comparison possible. Since parents have already registered their children for enrollment in grade-one French immersion in September, students who would have been in each of the two programs can be readily identified.

Without this information, any before and after comparisons would be hopelessly muddied. With this information, a rigorous comparison of results under each system can be made.

If the government is serious about basing its policies on sound research, then it should take advantage of the social experiment it is planning on conducting to carry out this kind of analysis.

This is the only way we will really know whether the shortfalls in literacy and other areas among New Brunswick students are due to the streaming produced by early immersion or to some other shortcomings in the education system. Before the school year is out, the Education Minister should see to it that the necessary research plan is in place and baseline testing has occurred.

Perhaps the results will reveal that streaming really is the problem some have suggested.

But if not, the main reason for eliminating early immersion will evaporate. In that case, the government would need to think seriously about reinstating the program in September 2009.

The Minister's announcement on Wednesday of other major changes to the anglophone school system for September - a revision of curriculum objectives, added resources to help struggling children and more - will throw a wrench in the works. Now if improvements in academic performance are seen in the coming year, we will not be able to say if they were due to the elimination of EFI or these other changes. It is an unfortunate that governments eager to bring about transformational change do not implement major reforms in the careful manner necessary to rigorous evaluation: one at a time instead of simultaneously.

Paul Howe teaches in the political science department at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton.