Reflections on the Debate about Early French Immersion

Joseph Dicks and Sally Rehorick

Faculty of Education

University of New Brunswick

January 29, 2003

Preamble

The District 2 Education Council (DEC) recently sought the support of Kindergarten parents for the replacement of Early French Immersion with a later starting immersion program.  In his letter to these parents, Chair Andrew Richardson said that the reason for doing this was so that the district could proceed with their objective in improving the English reading skills of K-3 children.  Mr. Richardson says that “recent international assessment results for New Brunswick [and] a recently commissioned independent review  [...] support this position.”  His direct implication therefore is that Early French Immersion has a detrimental effect on English literacy skills.  Elsewhere (CBC Radio One, Mainstreet, January 27, 2003), Mr. Richardson stated that another reason for proposing the later start for immersion was because of the streaming of children into two separate systems:  French immersion for the “best” students and core English for the rest (including the majority of children with special needs).  In the same radio program, he said that because French immersion graduates are not all meeting the stated program goals concerning their French language levels, the entry point should be later.  These three reasons for eliminating Early French Immersion are erroneous and misleading. 

The purpose of this short paper is to point out the wrong premises on which the District 2 proposal is based and to provide accurate information so that decision-makers can proceed.  Our position is not to defend Early French Immersion as the one and only program for learning French.  There are many sound ways to acquire a second language.  But when decisions are being made, they should at the very least be made based on correct information.  The facts are these:

• There is no research to support the claim that Early French Immersion has a detrimental effect on English literacy skills.  There is usually a temporary lag in English literacy skills, which disappears shortly after English is introduced into the curriculum (usually at Grade 2 or 3 or 4) and the immersion children catch up to and often surpass their counterparts in the English-only classes by Grade 5 or 6. 

• The later the entry point for French immersion, the more likely there will be a streaming effect.  In other words, the very problem District 2 is trying to fix could be made worse by delaying the entry point.  Early French Immersion has been shown again and again to offer the best means for children with the widest range of academic abilities to be successful. 

• Early French Immersion students are far and away more likely to reach the Advanced level of French proficiency than are students in any other program.  Advanced is a very high level of proficiency – in our Faculty of Education we only accept students into our courses for future teachers of French if they have an Advanced level or better.

• Medium and long-term academic effects Early French Immersion are very positive: in addition to developing fluency and literacy in English and French, students also have increased abilities to think in fluent and creative ways.  In some studies, math scores of children in Early French Immersion surpass those of English-only students, suggesting that being bilingual increases intellectual potential.  In any event, Early French Immersion students do not lose any ground in their other academic subjects.

• These same results are just as true for students who have learning difficulties as for those who do not.  In other words, the positive results are not due to the “best” students being in French immersion.  Students with learning difficulties can learn just as well in French immersion as in English classes, provided they receive the appropriate expert support.

Early French Immersion and English Literacy:  Two for One

The recent results of the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and the subsequent Scraba report on the state of public education in New Brunswick provide us with some important information and insight into our educational system as a whole, as well as the place of French immersion within that system.  There are several key results that deserve consideration and clarification.

International Assessment Results   First, let’s look at what the PISA results tell us and what they do not tell us.  PISA clearly indicates that Canadian students as whole are performing extremely well internationally – literacy scores place us third as a nation.  PISA also tells us that as a province within Canada, New Brunswick is not performing well.  Alberta is the best performing province, and New Brunswick is last.  No one likes to be last, and certainly New Brunswick can and should work to improve its performance.  However, given that Canada’s overall results were very high, New Brunswick students are still performing at around the average in comparison with other nations (just below Norway, France and the US, and just above Denmark, Switzerland and Spain.)  We also know that girls outperform boys in literacy assessment in all provinces including New Brunswick.  What we don’t know is why New Brunswick is not performing as well as other provinces. 

The PISA results do not, as School District 2 implied in its letter and survey to Kindergarten parents, provide evidence that Early French Immersion has a negative impact on English literacy skills.  PISA provided no breakdown of scores for the core English program and French immersion program students.  Moreover, many if not the vast majority of 15 year olds who wrote this assessment would have entered French immersion at grade four not at grade one.  (The grade one entry, early French immersion students, have just reached grade 8 for the first time this year.  They will be the next cohort to write the PISA in 2003.)  

Two other points clearly refute this claim.  The Francophone sector performed worse than the Anglophone sector on literacy.  They do not have an immersion program.  Also, provincial assessment of literacy at grade 5 indicates that French immersion students outperform core English students on reading and writing assessment in English. (These students did begin the Early French Immersion program at grade one.)  One might counter that these students have socioeconomic advantages, but the PISA results indicate that the link between socioeconomic background and literacy results was not strong and was weakest of all in Canada.

Research in the area of French immersion also consistently shows no negative effects on English literacy.  In the first years of the program, back in the 70s, parents’ primary concern was whether or not this new program would have a negative effect on their children’s English skills.  Consequently, this aspect was studied and researched at great length.  Numerous reports have been written on this issue.  Recently, researchers from the University of Toronto decided to examine this issue again with more modern approaches to testing literacy.  The results were consistent with earlier studies.  Early French immersion does not have a negative effect on English reading and writing.  In fact, there is evidence to suggest the opposite – that there is a positive effect.  (Those wishing to read a recent study on this issue are referred to an article by Turnbull et al in the Canadian Modern Language Review, Volume 58, No.1).

The Scraba Report   Let’s turn now to the Scraba report.  Ms. Scraba points out a number of problems with the New Brunswick educational system.  However, nowhere does she suggest that early French immersion is the cause of lower than average literacy scores.  In fact, she notes that research indicates that bilingual education should be an advantage.  Ms. Scraba recommends that French immersion students’ literacy skills be tested in French by the end of grade 3.   How School District 2 can interpret this as support for the elimination of the early French immersion program is beyond our comprehension.  Ms. Scraba does indicate that there are structural problems with French immersion programs but does not elaborate.  We do agree with this and would like to suggest a couple of structural changes that could help.

First, there should be a French immersion Kindergarten in New Brunswick.  This would have two positive consequences: 1) it would allow students to develop basic familiarity with French and some basic French literacy skills before going into grade one immersion; 2) it would avoid Kindergarten parents receiving inaccurate and incomplete information about whether or not their child is “suited” for French immersion based on how their child did in English Kindergarten.  The net effect would be a broader range of children entering French immersion at the Kindergarten level.

Second, there should be a targeted campaign to inform parents, school administrators, French immersion and core English teachers that students from a wide range of abilities can and do succeed in French immersion.  In conjunction with this, support needs to be put in place for students and for teachers of students who experience difficulty in French immersion.   Transfer out of French immersion to the core English program should be a last resort and a very rare occurrence.  This often causes even more difficulty for the child  and undermines the French immersion program.

Conclusion In conclusion we would like to say that School District 2’s proposal to eliminate Early French Immersion because of negative effects on English literacy flies in the face of a huge amount of evidence to the contrary.  The early entry point to French immersion is the most popular in the country because it provides the greatest opportunity for children of the widest range of abilities to become bilingual, without negative effects on English.  It is, in simplest terms, “a two for one deal”.   Delaying entry to French immersion until grade four or later will result in a smaller program, and a much more select program.  We ask this question:  Will parents of students who experience problems in literacy in English when tested at grade three be advised to go into the grade four entry FI program?  Not likely.   If District 2 wants a smaller more select program for other reasons then they should say so.  Saying they are doing this because of the effect of French immersion on English literacy skills does not add up.

When people talk about bilingualism in Canada, New Brunswick is often singled out as a model for the rest of the country.  There are many good reasons for this.  Its status as Canada’s only officially bilingual province is one.  The fact that its one-third French Acadian population and two-third English speaking population live in a climate of mutual respect and tolerance is second.   That all English speaking students study French from grade 1 until grade 10 and that nearly one-third of English speaking students are enrolled in French immersion is a third reason.  New Brunswick has much to be proud of when it comes to bilingualism. The federal government’s recently announced objective of doubling the number of functionally bilingual high school graduates by the year 2010 is a challenging one.  New Brunswick is well-positioned to meet that challenge. But we should not take this for granted. It is clear from the situation in Moncton (which has been recurrent over the years) that there are many emotions tied up in the issue of bilingual schooling. We agree with Alana Scraba (CBC Radio One, Mainstreet, January 28) when she says that blaming and arguing aren’t going to solve the problem – “It only makes people tired and angry”. Scraba has called for clarification of the French immersion “problem”, asserting that no one knows what exactly the “problem” is. More discussions need to be held with a broader range of stakeholders to ensure, as Scraba puts it, that all children can be learning to their maximum ability.  Such is not the case right now in New Brunswick.