Final Report French Immersion Review · Final Report French Immersion Review-- INTRODUCTION -- A. French Immersion in Louis Riel School Division All students in Louis Riel School

Final Report

French Immersion Review

Final Report


Prepared For:

Louis Riel School Division

Prepared by

��

“Helping Clients Make a Difference … Since 1984”

June 2015

“Helping clients make a difference … since 1984.”

Final Report


Table of Contents

Introduction .......................................................................................... 1

A. French Immersion in LRSD ................................................................... 1

B. French Immersion Review .................................................................... 2

Methodology ......................................................................................... 4

A. Evidence Synthesis ............................................................................... 4

B. Key Stakeholder Consultation .............................................................. 5

Discussion on Findings – Literature Review ............................ 8

A. Introduction ........................................................................................... 8

B. French Immersion in Canada, Manitoba and LRSD ............................ 8

C. Why French Immersion ....................................................................... 11

D. Who is Enrolled in French Immersion ................................................ 13

E. Reasons for Enrolment ....................................................................... 14

F. Newcomer Students in French Immersion ........................................ 15

G. French Immersion Models and French Language Proficiency ......... 17

H. French Immersion and Student Achievement in Other Areas .......... 18

I. French Immersion for All Students .................................................... 19

J. Strategies for Including All Students ................................................. 21

K. Student Attrition .................................................................................. 22

L. Access for All? ................................................................................... 24

M. FSL Educators and the Professional Environment ........................... 26

N. Leaving French Immersion ................................................................. 27

O. Conclusions from the Research ......................................................... 28

Discussion on Findings – Surveys, Focus Groups, and

Interviews ............................................................................................ 31

A. Key Stakeholder Characteristics ........................................................ 31

B. Reasons for Enrolment ....................................................................... 34

C. Goals of French Immersion ................................................................ 35

D. French Immersion in LRSD ................................................................. 37

E. French Immersion Students in LRSD ................................................. 47

F. Future of French Immersion in LRSD................................................. 56

Final Report (DRAFT)

Balanced School Day Review

Discussion on Findings – LRSD Community Population

Data ........................................................................................................ 58

A. Community Profiles ............................................................................. 58

Conclusions ........................................................................................ 62

A. Reasons for Enrolment ....................................................................... 62

B. Who is Enrolled in French Immersion ................................................ 62

C. French Immersion and Newcomer or Allophone Students ............... 65

D. French Immersion Model and Achievement ...................................... 66

E. French Immersion in the Inclusive Classroom .................................. 67

F. Attrition from French Immersion ........................................................ 67

G. French Immersion Students and Post-Secondary Education .......... 68

APPENDICES A. Bibliography

B. Student, Staff, Parent/Caregiver Surveys: Detailed Tables

Proactive Information Services Inc.

www.proactive.mb.ca

Proactive Information Services 580 Main Street Winnipeg MB R3B 1C7

LRSD French Immersion Review prepared by:

Executive Summary

Louis Riel School Division French Immersion Review

Executive Summary

LRSD French Immersion Review

LRSD’s French Immersion (FI) model is a total immersion ‘French milieu setting’ where all subjects are taught in French and ELA learning begins in Grade 2. Approximately 30% of LRSD students are enrolled in 12 FI schools, which is higher than the province as a whole. In addition, those choosing FI is increasing.

Given FI’s popularity and projected increasing enrolment, LRSD wanted more information about the Division’s FI model and to investigate why families are choosing this option. However, the Review was not an evaluation of French Immersion programming in LRSD, rather it brings together current research about FI with the voice of FI staff, students, and families.

LRSD French Immersion Review sources were:

A review of literature about FI (2006 – 2015); Web survey of FI staff, students, & parents; 9 pair interviews and 1 focus group with students in

Grades 6, 8, and 12 from 4 selected schools; 4 focus groups with staff from selected schools; Data provided by LRSD on the communities

served FI and English Language schools; and Attrition data provided by the Province of Manitoba.

The Review’s reach suggests confidence in the findings, as web survey response rates were high (78% for staff, 82% for students, and 60% for parents) and were corroborated by other sources.

Literature Review Findings

Certain themes emerged from an examination of the Canadian literature since 2006:

Families place their children in FI because they believe it will provide greater job opportunities;

Children from French/English bilingual households were more likely to be enrolled in FI than were students from English-only homes;

On a national level, children enrolled in FI tend to come from higher socio-economic backgrounds, but this may not be characteristic of all provinces;

Nationally, there may be more females than males enrolled in FI, although this research is dated and poorly sourced;

While FI enrolment is increasing, literature addressing reasons for this are noticeably absent;

Research suggests Allophone students were being discouraged from participating in FI, even though these students performed as well as their English-speaking counterparts;

Age of entry into the program, degree of language instruction, total cumulative time spent in the target language and pedagogical approach have been the variables that support students proficiency in language acquisition;

Students with academic challenges, including language impairments, benefit from FSL learning and this does not put them further at risk of poor academic success;

Students most commonly attrition out of FI at high school entry;

Some of the reasons teachers leave FI were inherent within the teaching profession, but others were specific to second language learning; and

About half of FI students attending university took courses in French, although it is not clear how many attended a French university.

French Immersion Review Findings

Reasons for Enrolment

LRSD families believe FI will improve their child(ren)’s future possibilities, particularly their employment options.

Who is Enrolled in FI in LRSD

Three quarters of students (77%) reported that someone else in their home/family spoke French;

Communities served by FI schools in LRSD are not more socially advantaged or disadvantaged than those served by English language schools;1

LRSD FI population is 54% female and 46% male, while in English Language schools it is 47% female and 53% male;

69% of parents and 83% of staff did not believe that FI is better suited to female students;

1 N.B. These data refer to communities that make up the

catchment of each of LRSD schools, and does not reference the socio-economic characteristics of the students enrolled in these schools.

My parents wanted me to

learn French because

they did not have this

privilege. (Student)

P a g e 2

LRSD French Immersion Review prepared by:

Executive Summary

Who is Enrolled in FI in LRSD (con’t)

Information from staff focus groups and the popular press suggested increasing FI enrolment could be influenced by French Immersion graduates choosing this option for their children. 23% of LRSD parents completing the survey had attended FI;

Information from various sources suggested that being of French-speaking heritage may influence families’ choice to place their child(ren) in FI. LRSD serves communities that have traditionally included families of French-speaking heritage.

FI and Newcomer Students

While community profile population-based data indicates that the communities served by FI and English Language schools have approximately the same percentage of the community population whose home language is not English, FI schools (2.2%) have a lower percentage of EAL funded students than do English Language schools (11.2%).

FI Model and Achievement

Students, staff, and parents affirmed LRSD’s FI model. Students expressed confidence in their French skills – 79% indicated they spoke and read (77%) well, while 69% felt they wrote well. Parents also felt the same. However, students’ use of French in school and on the school grounds deceases by grade level.

FI in the Inclusive Classroom

Staff believed FI was suitable for students with special learning needs (76%), but their opinions were split regarding the suitability of FI for students with first language literacy challenges (53% believe it is suitable, while 38% do not) and about the supports available for students with special learning needs.

In English Language schools, 5.7% of the population receive Level II or Level III funding. This is compared with an average of 0.8% for LRSD French Immersion schools.

Attrition From FI

Attrition patterns of students in and out of FI in LRSD are different than other urban school divisions and the province, explained partly by the different access points for late FI programs. Transition into Grade 7 is when LRSD loses the most students out of FI.

FI Students and Post-Secondary Education

Students completing the survey were not so sure of their post-secondary plans. While 27% planed to go to a French college/university, 42% were unsure. 39% believed they would take courses in French at an English college/university.

Questions Arising

Areas for further inquiry result from questions arising from the LRSD FI Review:

Collecting information about the socio-economic backgrounds of those enrolled in FI would provide a better understanding of the make up of this population;

Collecting information about students who leave FI could help answer questions about why students leave, thus informing FI practice and highlighting what can be done in order to address attrition;

Analysis of enrolment by gender over the past 10 years would determine if findings regarding enrolment by gender are similar to the past. This would also allow for analysis of attrition by gender to determine if male and female students leave FI at different rates and for different reasons. This may also inform whether FI pedagogy in LRSD is as supportive of males as it is of female learners and whether further inquiries into supporting male students in FI are warranted;

Collecting information about the heritage, languages spoken at home, other family members who are French-speaking, and whether parents attended FI may help determine if these are influencing increased enrolment;

Investigating lower percentages of funded Level II, III, and EAL students in FI would provide more information about the diversity of students in FI; and

Staff attitudes toward the suitability of FI for all learners and their perceptions of support warrants further inquiry.

For more information, please contact: Louis Riel School Division

Christian Michalik, Assistant Superintendent

Immersion graduates are

putting their children in

immersion. That speaks a lot

to the program. It is

expanding because of the

experience of people now

putting their children in the

program. (Staff)

My son has been seeing a

speech therapist for a few

year ...We feared that FI

may be too much for him

considering he is still kind of

learning English language

due to his speech

impediment. It has had the

opposite effect as his French

is much more

understandable than his

English. (Parent)

I am very happy that

LRSD is focused on

keeping milieu programs

versus dual track.

(Parent)

1

Final Report


-- INTRODUCTION -- A. French Immersion in Louis Riel School Division

All students in Louis Riel School Division have the opportunity to learn a second language within the French Immersion program. Key aspects and principles of the French Immersion program in LRSD are articulated in the Division’s Administrative Guidelines, section IHBEBA, entitled Bilingual Education: French Immersion Education. French Immersion programming is available for all students in the Division from Kindergarten through Grade 12, including those “who have little or no prior knowledge of, or opportunity for contact with, the French language outside the school environment.”1 LRSD’s French Immersion model is succinctly described in the Division’s French Immersion pamphlet:

The Louis Riel School Division offers its French Immersion Program in total immersion ‘French milieu settings.’ All school activities, except for those related to English Language Arts, are conducted in French. Staff members are bilingual and communicate in French. Teachers are familiar with the techniques of second language teaching in an immersion setting. Communication between the home and the school remains English.

All subjects are taught in French. The English Language Arts program begins in Grade 2 and comprises 20 to 25 per cent of the entire instructional time, as mandated by Manitoba Education.2

Beginning in September 2014, 12 of LRSD’s schools provide single track French Immersion programming. The Early French Immersion Program starts in Kindergarten at:

École Guyot (K – Grade 6) École Henri-Bergeron (K – Grade 6) École Howden (K – Grade 6) École Julie-Riel (K – Grade 5 Early Immersion and Middle French Immersion) École Marie-Anne-Gaboury (K – 8) École Provencher (K – Grade 6) École Saint-Germain (K – Grade 5) École Van Belleghem (K – Grade 6) École Varennes (K – Grade 8)

1 https://www.lrsd.net/leadership/administrative-guidelines/PolicyManual/Bilingual%20Instruction%20-

%20French%20Immersion%20Education.pdf#search=IHBEBA, p. 1. Appendices to this policy are available at https://www.lrsd.net/leadership/administrative-guidelines/PolicyManual/Research%20Citations.pdf#search=IHBEBA.

2 https://www.lrsd.net/What-We-Offer/French-Immersion/Documents/3.8-1.pdf.

2

Final Report


These students continue through Middle Years and Secondary at École George McDowell (Grades 6 - 8), Collège Béliveau (Grades 7 – 12) and Collège Jeanne-Sauvé (Grades 9 - 12). Finally, LRSD also offers the Middle Immersion Program at Grade 4, as a second point of entry into Immersion programming:

This program offers full-day French instruction in the classroom for Grade 4 and English is re-introduced in Grade 5. After Grade 6, Middle Immersion students unite with Early Immersion students to continue their studies to the end of the secondary school. In Grade 7, students may choose to continue their studies at the Middle Immersion School or attend the French Immersion School in their catchment.3

Approximately thirty percent of LRSD students attend French Immersion schools, a higher percent than the province as a whole. In addition, those choosing French Immersion has increased, creating an increased demand. Interestingly, Manitoba Education and Advanced Learning is also undertaking a French Language Education Review in order “...to further support the full implementation of the French Immersion Program within Manitoba schools.”4 Unfortunately only very preliminary reporting from this provincial process is currently available.

B. French Immersion Review Given the current realities of LRSD’s French Immersion Program, namely the programs popularity and projected increasing enrolment, the Division believed the time was right to focus inquiries around the Division’s model and to investigate why families are choosing this option for their children’s education. It is important to keep in mind that this Review is not intended as an evaluation of French Immersion programming in LRSD, rather it brings together current research about French Immersion programming with the voice of French Immersion staff, students and families. As a result, the French Immersion Review included two components or phases. The first of these phases focused on a synthesis of evidence supporting French Immersion education in general and the program in Louis Riel School Division in particular. This first component included a review of recent literature regarding certain aspects of French Immersion in Canada. In addition to the findings from the literature review, the evidence synthesis also included school-based enrolment and demographic data on each of LRSD’s French Immersion schools. Finally, this component of the Review included provincial information on French Immersion as well as information from metro Winnipeg school divisions regarding French Immersion programming and enrolment. The second component, Phase 2, included

3 https://www.lrsd.net/What-We-Offer/French-Immersion/Documents/3.8-2.pdf. This program is offered

at École Julie-Riel. 4 Manitoba Education and Advance Learning. French Language Education Review, page number not

available. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/finance/fr_grant/docs/exemplar_div_profile.pdf.

3

Final Report


consultation with key stakeholder in LRSD’s French Immersion programming, namely French Immersion staff (principals, vice-principals, teachers, and non-teaching staff), students, and families. Proactive Information Services, a Manitoba-based social research company, was contracted to undertake the Review. This report includes information gathered throughout the course of the French Immersion Review from all data sources and lines of inquiry.

4

Final Report


-- METHODOLOGY -- A. Phase 1: Evidence Synthesis

Phase 1 comprised of an evidence synthesis that grounded the French Immersion Review in validated practice, what is known about French Immersion education in the literature, as well as about French Immersion programming in Louis Riel School Division and other metro Winnipeg School Divisions.

1. Literature Review An examination of relevant educational research and literature was a component of the evidence synthesis. Louis Riel School Division completed a literature review to inform its 2007 policy IHBEBA, Bilingual Instruction: French Immersion Education. As a result, the current literature review built on information since 2006. French Immersion was a very broad and far-reaching topic and, as such certain parameters were needed to narrow the search. The Canadian context was a focus for the review, as Canada is somewhat of a unique context for French Immersion which differs greatly from bilingual education in other countries such as the United States. In addition, language abilities limited those undertaking the literature review to sources in English and French. Research for the literature review began after sources consulted previously by LRSD were forwarded to Proactive in late June 2014. An emergent design was used for the literature review, focusing on peer-reviewed primary and secondary sources, policy documents, as well as both publicly and privately funded final research reports.5 Searches were conducted of ERIC and EBSCOhost, using key words “French Immersion,” “French second language education,” and “French bilingual education.” In addition, searches of specific Canadian peer-reviewed journals were undertaken, including Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, The Canadian Modern Language Review, and TESL Canada Journal. Policy documents from Louis Riel School Division, Manitoba Education, and Alberta Education, as well as documents prepared for/by Association Canadienne des professeurs d’immersion (ACPI), Canadian Council on Learning, and Canadian Parents for French (CPF) were also searched. These parameters produced a body of literature of approximately 55 items. This included 28 articles from peer-reviewed Canadian journals, 12 research reports mostly from the professional associations listed above, eight policy documents, one book chapter and one unpublished or ‘grey’ literature source. In addition, while not included in the parameters above, two news articles from popular sources were also included, as they provided insight into context for increasing enrolment in French Immersion in LRSD.

5 Please note this does not include “grey literature” (unpublished sources). Nevertheless, one “grey

literature” document was included in the review, as this source was provided by LRSD.

5

Final Report


While every attempt was made to seek out the most recent and relevant sources, this literature review does not presume to be exhaustive. It is possible, and in fact likely, that other sources exist, as no review undertaken can comprehensively cover all issues surrounding French Immersion. Rather, the purpose is to present the broad strokes of issues in French Immersion through the lens of current research with an emphasis on Canada.

2. LRSD Enrolment and School-Based Population Data Enrolment and demographic data from all LRSD schools provided insights into how French Immersion enrolments compare to English only programming enrolments. A first instalment of enrolment and demographic data was forwarded to Proactive from LRSD in early September 2013-2014 school year. Updated data from 2014 was forwarded to Proactive for analysis and inclusion in this report on March 2, 2015.

B. Phase 2: Key Stakeholder Consultation Phase 2 of the French Immersion Review focussed on the voice of key stakeholders in French Immersion in LRSD, namely those of staff, students, and parents/caregivers; surveys were utilized for this purpose. The surveys provided broad-based information which was supplemented using qualitative methods. However, qualitative data collection could not be undertaken in all 12 French Immersion schools, therefore four schools were selected as sites for these data collection activities:

Collège Béliveau – Grades 7 to 12, Windsor Park Community, ‘medium’ socio-economic risk rating for catchment population

Collège Jeanne Sauvé – Grades 9 to 12, South Saint Vital Community, ‘medium’ socio-economic risk rating for catchment population

École Henri Bergeron – Kindergarten to Grade 6, Saint Boniface Community, ‘high’ socio-economic risk rating for catchment population

École Marie Anne Gaboury – Kindergarten to Grade 8, Saint Vital Community, ‘medium’ socio-economic risk rating for catchment population

The selection of these sites took into account age of student population, community, and socio-economic risk rating for catchment population. A focus group with selected staff took place in each of the four sites, while students’ voice were obtained using pair in-person interviews with younger students and a focus group with high school students.

1. Surveys of Staff, Students, and Families In order to have as broad participation as possible from French Immersion staff, students, and parents/caregivers, three web-based surveys were developed, one for each of the stakeholder groups. While all three surveys had common areas of inquiry, some questions were unique to each group. The main areas of inquiry for surveys included:

6

Final Report


Why families choose French Immersion; Perceptions of the strengths of French Immersion programming in LRSD; and, Perceptions regarding the population of French Immersion students.

Common questions allowed for comparison among respondent groups. Proactive drafted the surveys and forwarded the questions to LRSD for feedback. All French Immersion administrators as well as members of the Superintendent’s team had an opportunity for feedback. All surveys were revised according to the feedback received and put into online format. Links were sent to LRSD for testing and approval. Proactive forwarded the final survey links to LRSD on November 6, 2014. These were forwarded to school administrators along with a request to have all staff (teaching staff, school administrators, secretaries, and custodians) complete the survey online. In addition, schools were asked to provide an opportunity for all students in Grades 5 through 12 to complete the student survey using computers at the schools. The link for the parent/caregiver survey was also sent electronically to school administrators. Administrators sent emails with the survey link embedded to families in their school community inviting them to complete the survey. In addition, information about the French Immersion Review was posted on LRSD’s website at https://www.lrsd.net/News/Pages/French-Immersion-Study.aspx. This page included some brief information about the purpose of the review and contained the link to the parent survey, inviting parents/caregivers who had not already completed the survey to do so. Reminder emails were sent to all LRSD French Immersion schools on November 19 and November 26, 2014. In addition, LRSD provided updates to school administrators regarding the response numbers for each survey and were reminded to ensure students and staff had opportunities to complete the surveys. This resulted in 343 completed staff surveys, 1855 student surveys, and 1216 parent/guardian surveys.

2. Focus Groups Focus groups were undertaken with staff members from the four selected schools, including Collège Béliveau, Collège Jeanne Sauvé, École Henri Bergeron, and École Marie Anne Gaboury between November 12 and December 1, 2014. Participants included school administrators, classroom teachers, teachers in specialist roles, student services educators, and educational assistants. In total 32 staff participated in focus groups. The areas of inquiry for staff focus groups dealt with; the goals of French Immersion, the French Immersion model in LRSD, as well as perceptions regarding students’ achievements and future aspirations.

7

Final Report


In addition, a focus group was undertaken with seven Grade 12 students from Collège Jeanne Sauvé on November 12, 2014.6 Areas of inquiry for this focus group included reasons for enrolment in French Immersion, their experiences in French Immersion in Louis Riel School Divisions, and their future aspirations. All focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed for analysis.

3. Interviews Student pair7 interviews were undertaken at Collège Béliveau, École Henri Bergeron, and École Marie Anne Gaboury between November 18 and 24, 2014. Students in Grade 6 were selected from École Henri Bergeron, and École Marie Anne Gaboury, as they were the oldest elementary students in the school and would have the most extensive experience with French Immersion. At Collège Béliveau, students in Grade 8 were interviewed, as they were the oldest middle years students in the school. A total of nine interviews were undertaken involving 19 students, nine females and 10 males. These students were randomly selected by school administration to reflect a cross section of the school’s populations and included both strong and struggling learners. Questions for these interviews focussed on reasons for enrolment in French Immersion, their experiences in French Immersion in Louis Riel School Divisions, and future aspirations.

4. Analysis Qualitative data from focus groups and interviews were entered into matrixes according to area of inquiry. A thematic analysis was undertaken for each area of inquiry. Quantitative analysis of web survey data was undertaken in SPSS.

6 A focus group was undertaken with Grade 12 students as it was felt that a group discussion would

yield richer information. This replaced pair interviews with students at this school. 7 One interview involved three students.

8

Final Report


-- DISSCUSION OF FINDINGS --

LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Introduction As discussed previously, this literature review focused on French Immersion (FI) within the Canadian context as well as highlighting research and information since 2006, when Louis Riel School Division last undertook a similar endeavour in support of policy development. Certain themes emerged from an examination of the Canadian literature since 2006. These included:

Why families place their children in French Immersion;

Who is enrolled in French Immersion;

French Immersion models and achievement;

French Immersion and newcomer or Allophone students;

French Immersion in the inclusive classroom;

Student attrition from French Immersion;

French Immersion and the professional environment; and,

French Immersion students and post-secondary education.

B. French Immersion in Canada, Manitoba, and LRSD The history of French Immersion in Canada is lengthy, beginning with the first program in Saint-Lambert Quebec in 1965 and predating official bilingualism, the policy that made French an official language. The goal of this program, and French Immersion programs in Canada since that time, has been to provide intensive French second language programming to students who are not French speakers, with the goal that students achieve ‘functional bilingualism’ in French and English. Since that time, French Immersion spread across the country, although the models and structures of FI programming varied. French Immersion programming in Manitoba did not start until almost a decade after the first pilots in Quebec. Interest and uptake in French Immersion programs in Canada have varied since inception. French Immersion grew in the 1980s, became stagnant in the 1990s, and in 2007 included fewer than ten percent of eligible students nationwide. (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, French Immersion in Canada, pp. 3-8) Canadian Parents for French publishes its Annual FSL

9

Final Report


Enrolment in Canada report, the most recent of which dates from 2012. This source reported that enrolment in French Immersion in the 2010-2011 school year was 14 percent nationally, up from 13.2 five years earlier. Manitoba’s overall percentage enrolment in French Immersion was below the national average at 11.3 percent in 2010-2011. However, Manitoba’s overall participation in French Immersion increased more over the same five year period as compared nationally, up from 10.1 percent in 2006-2007. By comparison, French Immersion enrolment in Louis Riel School Division for a comparison year of 2010-2011 was 28.4% percent, while the Division’s enrolment for 2013-2014 was 31.6 percent. French Immersion was viewed as a way of bolstering official language policy in Canada by providing means of increasing rates of bilingualism. Nevertheless: “While rates of bilingualism in Canada have grown since official bilingualism and the advent of French Immersion, it is still relatively low – below 20% in 2007.” (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, French Immersion in Canada, p 2) French Immersion programming has manifested itself differently in various jurisdictions and locations. While the literature outlines various different ‘terms’ or nomenclature to describe programming, Manitoba’s Curriculum Policy for the French Immersion Program outlines types of instructional organization according to: “intensity (the time allotted for teaching in the French language and in the English language), length (the entry point into the program), and the school environment in which the program is offered.” (Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, 2008, p. 8) In terms of intensity, French language instruction is outlined as comprising 100 percent in Kindergarten, 75 to 80 percent of instructional time in Grades 1 through 6, 50 to 70 percent of instructional time in Grades 7 and 8, and “…minimum of 14 credits from courses taught in French are necessary to answer to the requirements of the French Immersion Program” in Grades 9 through 12. Points of entry in Manitoba include ‘early immersion,’ starting in Kindergarten or Grade 1, ‘middle immersion,’ starting in Grade 4, and ‘late immersion,’ starting in Grade 7.8 (Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, 2008, pp. 8-11) Finally, school environment in Manitoba is outlined as including three categories: the immersion school, the immersion centre, and the dual track school:

The immersion school is located in a building of its own where a French environment is fostered. This environment results from the use of French as the language of administration and internal communication, as well as the language of communication between teachers and students. The entire staff is fluent in French and English, thus assuring that all support services are offered in French. An immersion centre is established in the same building as an English Program when it is not possible to create an immersion school. Such a centre has its own administration and facilities and is, for all intents and

8 Please note, irrespective of point of entry, all program lengths continue until Grade 12.

10

Final Report


purposes, an autonomous school operating under the same roof as another school. Conditions similar to those in an immersion school are maintained. The dual track school has an English Program and a French Immersion Program headed by a single administration. Some members of the administrative and support staff, as well as the teaching assistants and specialists for the French Immersion Program, are fluent in French and English and ensure that services are administered in French. (Manitoba Education, Citizenship and Youth, 2008, pp. 12-13)

Louis Riel School Division’s French Immersion programs would be categorized as French Immersion schools. As previously stated, most FI schools in LRSD are early immersion schools, while there is a small middle immersion program in one school. One difference between early immersion in LRSD and the provincial model is that students in LRSD receive one hundred percent off their instruction in French, with English Language Arts beginning in Grade 2 and comprising twenty to twenty-five percent of instructional time. Research into French Immersion began very soon after program inception. Sylvie Roy’s 2010 article in the Canadian Journal of Education summarizes the research into French Immersion:

Studies in French immersion have focused on (a) the effects of immersion on learning French as a second language; (b) the effects on English, the L1; (c) the effects of learning a second language on other school subjects; and (d) the cognitive and social influence of learning a second language on immersion students, including special needs students (Genesee, 2003, 2004; Rebuffot, 1993). Some scholars are studying multilingual students in French immersion and their willingness to maintain their heritage languages (Mady, 2008). Others have studied immigrant students’ language practices at home and at school (Dagenais & Day, 1999; Dagenais, Day, & Toohey, 2006). (Roy, 2010, p. 543)

Roy’s colleague, Josée Makropoloulos, provides further details on the history of French Immersion research:

Over the past four decades, evaluation studies have portrayed French immersion programs in a relatively positive light (Churchill, 2002; Heller, 1990; OCOL, 2008). At first, studies helped dispel parental fears of bilingual education by showing that French immersion instruction did not pose a long term risk to the maintenance of English as a first language, and that it allowed students to reach high levels of proficiency in French that varied depending on the age of first instruction and on the extent of French exposure (Lambert & Tucker, 1972; Genesee, 1987; Swain & Lapkin, 1982). Research has also indicated that French immersion

11

Final Report


students performed as well, and in some cases better, in academic subjects than students enrolled in regular English programs (Turnbull, Lapkin, & Hart, 2001). Although the issue of social class bias in EFI [Early French Immersion] programs stirred considerable debate in the 1980s (Canadian Parents for French [CPF], 1982; Guttman, 1983; Olson & Burns, 1981, 1983), more recent research suggests that social class bias is less pronounced in LFI [Late French Immersion] programs (Hart & Lapkin, 1998) and in parts of Canada where the program is relatively accessible (Lamarre, 1997). Moreover, research shows that immigrant families from various class backgrounds send their children to French immersion programs (Dagenais & Jacquet, 2000; Ottawa Carleton District School Board [OCDSB], 2007) (Makropoulos, 2010, 517-518)

Therefore, by 2006 previous research and study in French Immersion focused on achievement in French and other areas of learning, the cognitive benefits of bilingualism, as well as potential social class bias. As a result, this previous work was summarized in more recent literature as a way of moving forward to different foci for current FI research and study.

C. Why French Immersion? French Immersion is only one educational option available to families in Manitoba, and more broadly in Canada. Some research has been conducted into why families have chosen this option for their children. Sylvie Roy’s 2010 study involving junior high school students in Alberta indicated:

The parents that I interviewed had various reasons for sending their children to early French immersion. They saw opportunities for their children to learn a second language and to add to their cognitive, social, and linguistic skills. Several said they chose French because it is an official language of Canada. (Roy, 2010, p. 549)9

The Canadian Council on Learning’s 2007 Survey of Canadians Attitudes Toward Learning provides further insight into why families may choose French Immersion: “…nearly 60% of Canadians cite increased job opportunities as a reason for enrolling their children in immersion programs.” (p. 29) Therefore, it appears families choose FI because they believe it benefit their children’s future employability.

9 While Roy’s research surfaces interesting issues regarding why families choose FI, caution is

warranted due to the sample for this research. Small sample size and a lack of geographic diversity in site choice require caution in applying findings to a larger population and to different areas of the country. According to Canadian Parents for French, Alberta has the lowest participation rate in French immersion of any province or territory in Canada exclusive of Nunavut, where FI is not offered.

12

Final Report


Furthermore, the benefits of bilingualism were well documented in Canada and elsewhere. These were succinctly summarized in the Canadian Council on Learning’s 2008 publication Parlez-vous français? The advantage of bilingualism in Canada. Cognitive benefits include: “...compared to their monolingual peers, bilingual children are better able to focus their attention on relevant information and ignore irrelevant distractions. Other research has shown that the effects of aging on the brain are diminished among bilingual adults.” (p. 2) Furthermore, the economic benefits of bilingualism in Canada were also clear, with bilingual adults having higher employment rates and individual incomes than their monolingual peers (pp. 2-4). As a result, families choose French Immersion for their children in the hopes they will attain functional bilingualism and the associated cognitive and economic benefits. Wally Lazaruk undertook a review of research into the linguistic, academic, and cognitive benefits of French Immersion in 2007. This review states:

The cognitive research reviewed here associates bilingualism with heightened mental flexibility and creative thinking skills, which may be linked to bilingual learners’ greater metalinguistic awareness. Bilinguals also demonstrate greater communicative sensitivity, as indicated by their responsiveness to verbal and non-verbal cues and by their ability to attend to listeners’ needs.” (Lazaruk, 2007, p. 623)

Because the benefits of multi-lingualism were well established, little in the most recent literature focuses on this issue. At times they are re-iterated, as done recently by Dr. Laura Hermans-Nymark in her 2013 article in Education Canada:

There are many advantages to being bilingual. Bilingualism enhances divergent thinking, memory, reasoning and problem-solving abilities; awareness and appreciation of different cultures; as well as flexibility, adaptability and openness in attitudes. (Page number not available)

Educational research and literature has focused on and widely discussed the benefits of multi-lingualism beyond acquiring language proficiency. Because this was well established in the literature, there is very little more recent work published about the benefits of bilingualism. However, the possibility of achieving these benefits remains a motivation for choosing French Immersion. Organizational issues were also found to influence the choice for French Immersion programming. These included issues regarding child care and transportation, as well as “…parents’ concerns about assisting their children with their schoolwork in their second language may deter parents from choosing immersion programs.” (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, Survey of Canadians Attitudes Toward Learning, p. 29) Finally, in some areas of the country, families don’t place their children in immersion because of the lack of programs or space.

13

Final Report


D. Who Is Enrolled in French Immersion Over the past seven years, attention has been paid to the analysis of French Immersion populations in order to consider who is enrolled in French Immersion. Some of this inquiry was spawned by popular attitudes that French Immersion students did not represent a cross-section of the Canadian population. In order to address this, the Canadian Council on Learning included questions regarding French Immersion in its annual Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learning (SCAL). This survey was designed by the Council in consultation with Statistics Canada and resulted from telephone interviews with 5,361 Canadians, making the results consistent with a nationally representative sample.10 Findings indicated that participation in French Immersion was not consistently correlated to parental educational attainment. Nevertheless, on a national level “...children enrolled in French-immersion programs tend to come from higher socio-economic backgrounds, although this pattern may not be characteristic of all provinces.” (p. 26) Furthermore, this research outlined that French Immersion programs are most popular among bilingual households: “In homes where both English and French are regularly spoken, parents are nearly five times more likely (4.5 times more likely) to report enrolling their children in immersion, compared to English-only homes.” (p. 26) Makropoulos also noted that families who would be eligible for French language schools are choosing to place their children in French Immersion:

In spite of greater accessibility to French language schools in Canada, a growing body of literature indicates that some parents eligible for official minority French instruction have been opting for French immersion programs that were designed for Anglophone students because they view the latter as being more accessible, of better quality, or more inclusive than French schools (Dolbec, 1994; Dallaire & Denis, 2000; Makropoulos, 2007; OCOL, 2008). (Makropoulos, 2010, 517)

This author advocated that this reality (that students eligible for French language school are present in some numbers in French Immersion) provided a basis for educators and districts to acknowledge this and to “...explore ways to promote positive identification and belonging with Francophone life within French immersion learning contexts.” (Makropoulos, 2010, 535) Finally, an examination of the literature appeared to support that more girls than boys are enrolled in French Immersion in Canada. Although this information appeared to warrant further study, Kissau and Turnbull note: “...girls account for 64% of all students enrolled in French Immersion programs in 2000.” (Kissau & Turnbull, 2008, p. 153). In addition, Statistics Canada information from 2008 states that “While the proportion of girls and of boys in non-immersion programs is roughly equal in all provinces, girls account for 3 of 5 students in French immersion

10 For more information in the specific parameters of this study please see http://www.ccl-

cca.ca/CCL/Reports/SCAL/2007Archive/.

14

Final Report


programs in all provinces except Quebec.” (Statistics Canada, 2008, page numbers not available). However, these authors also caution that this information may not be true for all geographical regions in Canada. Although dated, information from a 1998/1999 survey of French Immersion graduates in Manitoba suggested the proportion of males enrolled in milieu or immersion centres was higher than in dual track schools: “…these schools [milieu and immersion centres] have proportionally more males in S4 than do dual-track schools (41.5% and 31.8%, respectively)” (Manitoba Education, Training and Youth, 2002, Survey of 1998 and 1999 French Immersion Graduates, p. 33). Nevertheless, there are limitations to these data.11 These authors further advocate:

The studies documented in this report demonstrating the general lack of male interest in learning second and foreign languages represents the first step in improving male participation and achievement in the FSL classroom. Having taken this first step, it is now time to move beyond investigating the existence of gender differences and to begin exploring the many reason behind such differences. Numerous factors influence a student’s interest in learning another language. As a result, it does not suffice to simply state that males are less interested than females in second and foreign language learning. We must investigate the various causes and influences of this lack of interest. An important component of this second step in research is the acknowledgement that the lack of male interest in language learning cannot be simply attributed to biological differences. Change will only come about when schools, teachers, parents, and boys themselves recognize that boys are responsible for their own success and failure. (Kissau & Turnbull, 2008, p. 165).

Therefore, a review of recent literature suggests that while some conclusions may be drawn regarding French Immersion enrolment, other characteristics regarding those in FI were more speculative. While it seems clear that those from families in which French was spoken appear to choose French Immersion, other conclusions such as those relating to parental educational attainment and socio-economic background are less conclusive and deserve further investigation. Finally, the gender split in FI enrolment appears to also deserve further attention.

E. Reasons for Rising Enrolment Enrolment in French Immersion is up across the country and in Manitoba. Very little research or information published in peer reviewed sources sought to explain this increase, however speculation in the popular press proposes this may be due to newcomers increasingly choosing French Immersion as an option for their children. Although not a peer reviewed source, an

11 The reader is cautioned regarding the limitations of this data. Not only is it dated, the source of this

information within the report is not clear, although it is presumed to be enrolment data from that that time.

15

Final Report


article posted on CBC Manitoba on May 8, 2013 indicates that newcomers to this province are increasingly enrolling their children in French Immersion:

In 2012-13, 21,235 students were in French immersion, according to preliminary figures from the provincial government. That is up 745 students from 20,490 in 2011-12. The provincial Education Department says it does not have data regarding immigrant or refugee children enrolled in French immersion programs. Officials say they expect French immersion enrolment to continue growing slowly in the coming years, assuming immigration levels stay the same and families remain interested in having their children learn more than one language. (CBC Manitoba, 2013, page numbers not available)

Immigration into Manitoba has increased over a period of years, from 3,725 newcomers in 1999 to over 13,000 in 2012. Therefore, it appears that this might be a factor in increasing French Immersion enrolment, although further study is needed. In addition, Globe and Mail demographics reporter Joe Friesen, suggested in a 2013 article that increasing French Immersion enrolment may also be impacted by a generation of FI graduates now choosing this option for their children:

The first wave of French immersion graduates were hitting their mid-30s in the 2006 to 2001 period when these new statistics were gathered. The average age at first birth in Canada is 28, so their children were likely beginning to arrive at school in the middle part of the last decade. The size of that group isn’t clear, but there is some evidence that French immersion students considered the education they received enough of an advantage to want to pass it on. (Friesen, 2013, page numbers not available)

Graduates of French Immersion usually have a good command of the language themselves. As a result, this hypothesis may be fostered by the Canadian Council on Learning’s findings that families where French and English are spoken were far more likely to enroll their own children in French Immersion.

F. Newcomer Students in French Immersion Discussion of who is enrolled in French Immersion suggests that newcomers may be enrolling in the program in larger numbers. Furthermore, recent Canadian literature explored issues around Allophone students in FI.12 While speculation that increasing numbers of newcomers

12 Allophones are individuals who speak neither English nor French as a first language and where that

language is still spoken in the home and who are living in a part of Canada where English is the dominant language.

16

Final Report


may have been a factor in increasing French Immersion enrolment, recent research has outlined that Allophone students were being discouraged from participating in FSL out of concern that learning French will add to the ‘burden’ of Allophone students who are also learning English at the same time:

...it has been argued that immigrants to Canada have been discouraged from enrolling their children in FI programs because “learning English as a second language presents enough of a challenge” (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, p. 9), although the available research evidence involving English language learners clearly challenges this assumption (Dagenais & Berron, 2001; Mady, 2007; Swain, Lapkin, Rowen, & Hart, 1990). (Wise, 2011, p. 178)

This was affirmed in Mady and Turnbull in 2012 who indicate that Allophone students in Ontario were being ‘excluded’ from FSL learning opportunities even though French was mandatory from Grades 4 through 9. However, these authors did indicate that there was a need for further research to shed light on whether this was the case in other jurisdictions. (p. 133) Research has confirmed that French Immersion students who spoke neither French nor English as a first language perform just as well as their English speaking counterparts: “...the available evidence indicates that immigrant ESL students enrolled in French Immersion perform as well as their Anglophone counterparts, and ESL students who come to French Immersion having already developed literacy in their home language often perform even better than Anglophone students.” (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, French Immersion in Canada, p. 9) This suggested that English as an Additional Language issues would not be a reason for newcomer students/families to be discouraged from participating in French Immersion. If this is the case, why was there also evidence that newcomer/Allophone learners did not have access to French second language programming? The answer appears to be in systemic misunderstanding and educator attitudes. Mady and Turnbull quoted the work of previous researchers in support of this assumption:

...Lapkin, Macfarlane, and Vandergrift surveyed 1,305 FSL teachers from across the country in 2006 about their beliefs and attitudes toward Allophone students in their classrooms. This survey revealed that “...dealing with diversity in their classrooms was their greatest challenge, specifically highlighting Allophone student as one source of the diversity.” Teachers indicated they felt Allophone students had difficulty participating in class and with assigned work in French. (Mady & Turnbull, 2012, p. 13)

Furthermore, Callie Mady undertook research in 2010 for Canadian Parents for French in which she surveyed 125 Allophone university students from across Canada. Conclusions from this research indicated “...33% of Allophone students report their school discouraged their enrolment and 42% had disallowed their enrolment.” (Canadian Parents for French, 2010, p. 8) However, it

17

Final Report


is interesting to note that recent literature suggested that newcomer/Allophone students were highly motivated to learn French, as they saw it as important to their future and to their integration into Canadian society. (Mady and Turnbull, 2012, pp. 136-137) In addition, Allophone parents/families appeared to value French and English learning for their children. Mady’s 2010 study for Canadian Parents for French found that “...40% enrolled their children in French immersion, an impressive rate given provincial enrolment rates that range from 6% to 26% outside Quebec ... [while] 50% of those who had not put their children in immersion would have done so if they had had information about the program.”13 (Canadian Parents for French, 2010, p. 8) While these findings emerged from a small study, they do suggest the need for further research and reflect the possibility that newcomer/Allophone students and families value participation in French Immersion.

G. French Immersion Models and French Language Proficiency The research into factors that support success of French Immersion students in achieving second language proficiency are clearly established: “Forty years of research and evaluation has identified four interrelated variables that affect second language attainment in school settings: age of entry to the program, degree of intensity of language instruction, total cumulative time spent in target language, and the pedagogical approach to language teaching.” (Canadian Parents for French, 2008, p. 16) Similar findings were published in the same year by the Canadian Council on Learning and Dr. Wally Lazaruk:

The level of French proficiency attained by immersion students depends on the age of first instruction and on the extent of French instruction. Total-immersion students tend to outperform partial-immersion students on all types of tests. Early-immersion students show higher degrees of proficiency in reading, listening comprehension, oral production, grammar and writing than late-immersion students. Early-immersion students also tend to outperform delayed (or middle) immersion students on some French tests, though the differences in performance are sometimes small. (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, French Immersion in Canada, pp. 5-6)

In addition, Lararuk further concluded that students studying in French Immersion can achieve language proficiency in both French and English: “...French immersion programs enable students to develop high levels of proficiency in both French and English, at no cost to their overall academic success. EFI students typically develop ‘native-like’ receptive school-based

13 Caution is warranted for these findings due to small sample size. This study was undertaken from

three focus groups with parents in Toronto, Vancouver, and North Bay. While the exact sample size is unclear (19 individuals/site or in total), this sample size does not permit these findings to be generalizable.

18

Final Report


language skills in French by about 11 years of age and achieve high levels of proficiency in speaking and writing by graduation.” (Lazaruk, 2007, p. 623) Keeping in mind the models of French Immersion outlined in Manitoba’s Curriculum Policy for the French Immersion Program, research indicated students were more likely to achieve higher levels of French language proficiency if they have access to French Immersion study at as early an age as possible. Furthermore, settings which provide maximum time spent in French as well as many student experiences in French supported language acquisition. In his 2011 publication Vivre et enseigner en milieu minoritaire : Théories et interventions en Ontario français, Georges Duquette elaborates a number of principles to keep in mind when it comes to developing second language. He argued that some of these are best met in an exclusively French Immersion setting:

Pour un bilinguisme équilibré, il est nécessaire de renforcer la langue faible...les compétences de communication se développent en contexte, autour de routines culturelles établies et définies…Un langage s'associe mieux avec les compétences culturelles qui lui sont authentiques. (Duquette, 2012, page number not available)14

The benefits of bilingualism in Canada have been previously noted. Therefore, models of French Immersion that support students to become more fluently bilingual may help students reap the cognitive and economic benefits of bilingualism: “Because cognitive benefits are contingent on a bilingual learner’s proficiency in both languages, it may be that Immersion programs, which promote heightened proficiency in both French and English, foster in their students an underlying cognitive advantage.” (Lazaruk, 2007, pp. 623-624)

H. French Immersion and Student Achievement in Other Areas One of the early concerns raised by French Immersion in Canada was that studying in a second language would affect students’ further learning of English. Recent research, as well as earlier studies, indicated that this has not been the case:

Our findings regarding the variables that predicted French immersion children’s English reading development were largely consistent with those of previous studies of monolingual English language children, despite the fact that our participants were receiving much of their schooling in French....this suggests that concurrently learning to read in French did not alter the course of English reading development. (Jared et al, 2010, p. 17)

14 “For balanced bilingualism, it is necessary to reinforce the weak language...communication

competencies develop in context, around established and defined cultural routines...A language is better associated with cultural competencies that are authentic.” (Translation of all French quotations included in this document are by Proactive Information Services.)

19

Final Report


Therefore, studying in a French Immersion setting does not negatively affect students’ English reading development. Years ago, concerns were also raised that students studying mathematics and science in a second language would not achieve to the same level as those studying in their first language. Again, this hypothesis was not affirmed: “Generally, research indicates that French-immersion student perform as well, and in some cases better than English students on tests of science and mathematics.” (Canadian Council on Learning, 2007, French Immersion in Canada, p. 6) Concerns regarding whether studying in another language adversely affects first language and other subject achievement have been largely dispelled. As a result, this question is not frequently addressed in recent literature on French Immersion.

I. French Immersion for All Students Much of the recent literature focuses on whether or not studying in a second language is appropriate for all learners. This is not surprising given that inclusion is the dominant educational lens in Canada and provincial policies such as Manitoba’s Appropriate Education Act. In particular, the work of Dr. Fred Genesee at McGill University focuses almost exclusively on student achievement in French Immersion among all students:

The notion of “suitability” of FSL for students with learning difficulties has been questioned and debated since the inception of the French immersion program in Canada (see Genesee, 2007 & Mannavaryan, 2003, for reviews). This debate continues in spite of the fact that there has been more positive evidence than negative evidence that French immersion can be of benefit to students with uneasy relationships with language, in general (Genesee, 2007). (Arnett, Mady, & Muilenburg, 2014, p. 448)

Genesee’s 2007 article in The Canadian Modern Languages Review examines the research evidence regarding students with academic challenges benefit from FSL programming or whether they are put at further risk of poor academic success by being in French Immersion. Genesee’s conclusions from the available research indicate that students with learning challenges who are in French Immersion programs fare as well as their counterparts in English language programming. This is further elaborated in Genesee and Jared’s article of 2008 in Canadian Psychology where research into literacy development of students in French Immersion is compared with those in English programming: “Of most importance, there were no statistically significant differences between below-average students in immersion and those in the English program on these tests, indicating that the below-average immersion students were not at greater risk for low reading achievement in comparison with students in the English program.” (Genesee and Jared, 2008, pp. 141-142) Furthermore, Genesee advocates:

Research by Bruck (1985a, 1985b) found that students experiencing difficulty in immersion are not precluded from staying in the program and

20

Final Report


progressing at a rate commensurate with their level of ability. At the same time, both studies found that students with academic difficulties can benefit from immersion in the form of increased levels of functional proficiency in French. (Genesee, 2007, p. 673)

These findings have been re-iterated in peer-reviewed journals as well as other fora and publications such as Canadian Parents for French’s State of French Language Education in Canada 2012. The issue of the ‘suitability’ of French Immersion for students with language impairments or those who struggle in their first language surfaces as an issue for French Immersion educators and families alike. Again, research indicates that students with language impairments or who are struggling readers achieve in a similar way in Immersion as their English language counterparts:

Research finds that children with language impairment performed the same whether in immersion or non-immersion program.... Second-language students are not at greater risk for reading impairment despite the commonly held belief to the contrary. They may struggle to learn to read more than children in an English-language program because they don’t know the language, not because of clinical problems. (Canadian Parents for French, The State of French Second Language Education in Canada, 2012, p. 6)

Interestingly, this conclusion was first outlined in Genesee 2007, (p. 673) and reaffirmed again by Genesee and Jared in 2008 (p. 142). Katy Arnott’s 2013 article in Education Canada took this notion further by suggesting that studying in two languages might support struggling learners:

We also know that even in situations where a child only gets additional support in the home language (and not in the second language), the child’s skills in the second language benefit from the cross-lingual support. In other words, it should not be assumed that English-only support is a detriment to developing FSL proficiency. Thus, research has shown that disability is not a barrier to language study and that any support for an individual with an exceptionality benefits all languages the student knows. (Arnott, 2013, page number not available)

Arnott goes on to suggest that because good second language pedagogy is also good pedagogy for students who have learning difficulties in first language: “I have been struck by the compatibility between the pedagogies promoted for good language teaching and the strategies I have discovered are beneficial for students who have a harder time understanding and expressing language.” (Arnott, 2013, page number not available) Renée Bourgoin recently

21

Final Report


stated: “French immersion classrooms have increasingly become more diverse. Inclusionary practices and policies from Canadian Ministries of Education are playing an increasingly vital role in ensuring continued access to and retention in French Immersion programs.” (Bourgoin, 2014, p. 8) Therefore, an examination of the literature reveals there was no research evidence indicating that students with special learning needs of any sort, including language delays in their first language, could not be accommodated in French Immersion. In Manitoba, the 2007 Handbook for School Leaders outlines the legal implications for the need to promote inclusion in the province’s immersion programs:

Students who are born with or who acquire physical disabilities are easily accommodated in the French immersion program. Parents need to be encouraged to consider this option, as it is a way to expand their child’s social and cultural horizons and to give the child an added advantage later on in a greater variety of social and cultural settings and in the job market. (p. 9-2)

Denying some students the added advantages of learning a second language, based on disabilities or exceptional learning needs, brings forth major ethical and legal questions. The Handbook for School Leaders further stipulates that, “students with special needs have the same entitlement to be in the French Immersion Program as in any other program in any public or funded independent school in Manitoba” (p. 9–1).” Renée Bourgoin’s analysis of provincial policy demonstrated that Manitoba has some of the strongest statements regarding the inclusion and suitability of French Immersion for all students. (Bourgoin, 2014, p. 5)

J. Strategies for Including All Students in French Immersion Like monolingual counterparts, early identification of students who are at-risk for academic challenges was also critical for students in French Immersion. This was particularly acute for those at-risk of experiencing difficulty in learning to read. However, assessment for potential reading issues was often delayed for French Immersion students until Grades 2 or 3 when they have acquired more French listening and speaking skills. However, this delay can prevent French Immersion students from receiving timely interventions that could foster reading. Wise and Chen point to earlier research that indicated: “...English phonological awareness tests can be used to identify weak readers in French Immersion at the beginning of the school year, rather than waiting until French oral proficiency is acquired. Following early identification, instructional interventions can be initiated to narrow the gap between the lowest-achieving children and their peers.” (Wise & Chen, 2009, p. 1) Furthermore, Callie Mady stresses that strategies that support academically-challanged learners in French Immersion help all students. These include:

22

Final Report


...demonstrating techniques, using manipulatives, supporting oral language with writing, judicious use of students’ first language, pre-teaching vocabulary, rephrasing and restating, using simpler language, teaching explicit strategies, and pacing lessons. Other strategies include highlighting text, modifying text, modifying grading systems, varying the lengths of assignments, chunking tasks, and using a variety of assignments. (Canadian Parents For French, The State of French Second Language Education in Canada, 2012, p. 12)

K. Student Attrition Like all second language programs, French Immersion has experienced student attrition. Evidence from the Canadian Council on Learning and others indicated this happens most frequently in Grade 7 as students move from elementary to middle school. (Canadian Council on Learning, French Immersion in Canada, 2007, p. 9) Makropoulus outlines that attrition from French Immersion was particularly pronounced as students move into secondary:

Although French immersion education has been successful in fostering bilingualism rates among young Canadian students, research indicates that student participation rates in the program significantly drop at the secondary level (Beck, 2004; Canadian Council on Learning [CCL], 2007; Halsall, 1997; Makropoulos, 1998, 2007; Mannavaryan, 2002). Attrition rates are particularly high among secondary students who are college-bound and among those with learning disabilities. The lack of qualified teachers capable of offering senior-level courses in French is another contributing factor to this problem. (Makropoulos, 2010, p. 518)

Ronald Cadez’s research on attrition from French Immersion in three high schools in Western Canada supports Makropoulos’ work:

One of the most potent reasons underlying the decision of the parents and students to leave the immersion program appears to be academic difficulties (Adiv, 1979; Alberta Education, 1985; Duhamel, 1985; Halsall, 1991; Hayden, 1988; Lewis & Shapson, 1989; Obadia & Theriault, 1995; Ottawa-Carleton, 2000; Parkin et al., 1987) In a survey of teachers and administrators, the researchers (Obadia & Theriault, 1995) found that academic difficulty, social and emotional difficulty, and the quality of teaching programs, in that order, were the three major problems given by students leaving immersion programs. (Cadez, 2007, pp. 9-10)

Work by Fred Genesee and others, suggested that students and families who are experiencing difficulties may be ‘counselled out’ of French Immersion, despite there being little evidence that leaving FI benefits these students’ achievement: “According to Genesee (2007a), much of the

23

Final Report


research on the issue of transferring programs is based on people’s own interpretation, and as such, may not be considered evidence-based in determining the suitability of French Immersion for students at-risk for learning difficulties.” (Bourgoin, 2014, p. 4) It appears that school boards/districts may not provide many supports for students with special learning needs in French Immersion settings, resulting in students in difficulty leaving the program. It is suggested this may be contributing to the perception that FI is only suitable for higher achieving students:

There are very few district school boards in the province [Ontario] that have made a serious commitment to address their needs [those of students with special learning needs] in the Immersion context. In most cases, they are simply counselled out and encouraged to transfer to the regular English program where they can access a wider array of special education support programs and services (Cummins, 1984; Stern, 1991). It is noteworthy that the transfer of exceptional students from the FI program to the regular English program is not officially sanctioned as a special education placement option in the Ontario curriculum guidelines, but more often than not, school authorities lead parents to the conclusion that transfer is in the best interest of their children (Cummins, 1984; Mady & Arnett, 2009; Stern, 1991) (Wise, 2011, p. 188)

While Mady and Arnett’s work suggested this practice was prevalent in Ontario, Canadian Parents for French’s 2012 roundtable on FSL learning in Canada suggested this issue may be more widespread:

...exceptional students do not have equitable access to special education programs and services. School authorities present persuasive (though unsubstantiated) arguments suggesting that the child’s educational needs would be best met in the English program and often advise parents to switch their children’s program for special education support....There is little evidence that performance of exceptional students in French immersion compares unfavourably with their peers in the regular English program. Ultimately, this practice weakens the regular English program and perpetuates the elitist status commonly attributed to French immersion. (Canadian Parents for French, State of Second Language Education in Canada, 2012, p. 3)

Not only would it appear that the transferring of struggling learners from French Immersion not be warranted or recommended, the Manitoba Handbook for School Leaders suggested this may have a negative effect on learners: “Research also suggests that the loss of self-esteem, the change in peer grouping, and sibling rivalry and other family issues as well as a sense of failure may be caused by the transfer, and may even cause the learning or behaviour problem to get worse.” (Pellerin, 2009, pages not numbered)

24

Final Report


L. Access for All? With the growth of French Immersion in the 1980s, studies into whether students who struggle academically would be adversely affected if they participated in the program were undertaken. At the time, researchers cautioned that this debate might lead to students who experience difficulties being transferred out of French Immersion, thus creating a perception that French Immersion was targeted for the elite (Mady and Arnett, 2009, p. 43). Although research indicated that students with special learning needs were not adversely affected by French Immersion participation, this perception has persisted, and was still an issue explored recently in the literature. However, more recent literature suggested students with special learning needs can, and in fact should, be accommodated in French Immersion programs:

Members of the FI community should begin to question the legitimacy of inequitable access to special education programs and services for exceptional pupils in FI elementary schools. In order to effect change, the status quo must be rejected. The status quo, in this case, amounts to “the virtual exclusion from French immersion programs of children with special needs” (Willms, 2008, p. 92). Sleeter, Torres, and Laughlin (2004) have suggested that, “critical understanding entails unveiling the myths created by the oppressors to maintain the status quo” (p. 82). This process requires that exceptional students’ educational needs in the FI context be acknowledged, and that action be taken to address this longstanding issue affecting their access to appropriate support service. (Wise, 2011, p. 182)

A number of sources indicated students with special learning needs did not have access to French Immersion or were ‘counselled out’ more because of attitudes than because of evidence. Pellerin, Mady and Arnett, and Wise all suggested educator/professional attitudes toward the inclusion of at-risk learners contributed to issues of access for this population:

…not all immersion educators share the same beliefs and knowledge about the benefits of the French immersion program for students with disabilities. Many professionals justify the transfer of a student out of immersion by saying that it will contribute to the improvement of the student’s academic success and his/her behaviour. However, research (Government of Alberta, 2004) has demonstrated that in most cases transfer does not automatically result in improvements. There is no research to date that could provide evidence (see French Immersion in Manitoba: A Handbook for School Leaders) that students who experienced learning difficulties in French immersion and were moved to an English-only program improved more than those who remained in the immersion program.” (Pellerin, 2009, pages not numbered)

25

Final Report


A 2009 case study by Mady and Arnett suggested that individual principals’ beliefs were likely more influential in informing decisions regarding struggling students than research (Arnett, Mady, & Muilenburg, p. 448) Nancy Wise pointed out that: “Educators also lack incentive to promote more inclusionary practices....Many believe that French immersion is an enrichment program geared to the academically elite and complain about students ‘who really shouldn’t be in the program.’ These teachers are inadequately prepared to meet the diverse learning needs of exceptional students.” (Canadian Parents for French, State of Second Language Education in Canada, 2012, pp. 3-4) She recommended teacher education and professional development are needed to support FSL teachers in meeting the needs of all students. In fact, Mady revealed: “Many teachers do not get the supports they need to help academically-challenged student succeed, which allows them to maintain their negative beliefs....after a six-week exposure to research showing that academically-challenged students can benefit from French Immersion programs, teacher and teacher-candidates at a CASLT professional development program were prepared to change their views and include these students in French Immersion programs.” (Canadian Parents for French, State of Second Language Education in Canada, 2012, pp. 11-12) In addition, parental attitudes contributed to students with special needs being excluded from French Immersion, either by discouraging families with special needs children to enter the program or by encouraging students experiencing difficulties in FI to transfer to an English-only program. As Nancy Wise states:

Parents who choose to enrol their children in the FI program, commonly referred to in popular media sources as “a poor mans’ [sic] private school” are highly unlikely to oppose the practice of counselling out exceptional students. Why would they? This group of FI stakeholders has aspirations for their offspring to reap the intellectual benefits of bilingualism (Baker, 2006). Arguably, the transfer of students with special needs to the regular English stream only adds to the overall quality of their children’s educational experiences. The soaring demand for FI programs reported by the press in recent years (Carlson, 2009) can be partially explained by the high concentrations of students with special needs in English-language classrooms (Willms, 2008). So, what parent would turn down the opportunity to place their child in a learning environment that caters to the academic elite (Hart & Lapkin, 1998)? (Wise, 2011, p. 183)

Finally, issues of access to French Immersion also appear to affect Allophone learners. The literature suggests that this population may also be discouraged from accessing French Immersion because of educator or professional beliefs rather than the evidence that Allophones succeeded in FI programming. Mady and Turnbull outline that changes are needed in order to ensure equitable access to FSL learning opportunities for Allophone learners: “Canadian educators have a moral and ethical responsibility to ensure that all Canadians have equitable

26

Final Report


access to studying both of Canada’s official languages. Denying Allophones access to FSOL programs denies them important capital or achieving success in Canadian schools and in society.” (Mady & Turnbull, 2012, p. 138) Nancy Wise argued that what was needed in order to change attitudes which have fostered issues of access to French Immersion was a change in the status quo. From a critical pedagogy perspective, the issue of access to French Immersion programs requires acknowledgement and discussion in order to engender change (Wise, 2011, p. 189).

M. FSL Educators and the Professional Environment The issue of teacher attrition is not new within educational research. In a recent Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy article, teacher attrition was described as a “...persistent...phenomenon for almost two decades...”. While it is also worth noting that recent data of teacher attrition in the Canadian context is sadly lacking, a Canadian Teachers’ Federation publication from 2004 states: In 2004, the estimated teacher turnover in Canada was approximately 30% in the first 5 years of service (Kutsyuruba et al, 2014, p. 2). However, it is also noted that attrition is higher among certain segments of the teaching profession, notably in the first five years within French second language contexts. A survey of 1305 FSL teachers undertaken by Lapkin et al in 2006 indicated that 40% of respondents had considered leaving FSL teaching. However, this research did not include more information about teachers’ reasons for considering this decision. (p. 1) Around the same time, Canadian Parents for French research indicated “All provinces except Alberta and Nova Scotia report shortage of qualified teachers in French immersion (CPF, 2006)...the principle reason for the teacher shortage in French Immersion are retirement and too few graduates.” (Ewart, 2009, pp. 474-475). Gestny Ewart’s research into French Immersion teachers in Manitoba suggests that a shortage in this province was more likely due to not having sufficient graduates who enter the profession with the competencies needed to teach French Immersion: “...teacher attrition does not seem to be an issue in Manitoba for French Immersion and minority French first language classrooms. It could be that the shortage of teachers competent in these two programs may be linked to too few graduates.” (Ewart, 2009, p. 498) Research undertaken in 2008 for the Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers explores why French Immersion and FSL teachers leave the profession. The landscape of French instruction over the past decade suggested that most jurisdictions had a shortage of FSL teachers and that some of this was due to early career teachers leaving the profession. This study used online surveys as well as interviews to probe further into reasons for attrition and discovered a series of inter-rated factors, some of which were inherent in the teacher profession generally while other might be attributed to second language learning environments in particular. Similar to their colleagues in first language programs, FSL teachers indicated they left the profession because of “...problems of classroom management and sometimes difficult clientele...” as well as “... challenges with school management/administration and colleagues.”

27

Final Report


(Karsenti et al, 2008, pp. 6-7) However, FSL teachers also pointed to issues inherent in working in second language settings as contributing to them leaving the profession, as well as a lack of instructional materials appropriate for French Immersion. The Canadian Education Association, in its fall 2013 edition of Education Canada, examined the theme of educator engagement. While no articles or research included in this issue dealt specifically with engagement of FSL educators, further explorations into aspects of teacher engagement in Canada may help shed light on the educator attrition issues particular to French Immersion.

N. Leaving French Immersion: FSL Learners and

Post-Secondary Education Some recent literature explored the life of French Immersion students after they leave the program. The Canadian Council on Learning reported in 2007 that:

Many learners of French as a second language (FSL) feel that their French skills, particularly their writing skills, deteriorate quickly when not used regularly. Others see obstacles in pursuing French in university. Some of the most common reasons offered by French-immersion students for not taking French classes in university were timetable conflicts, the belief that their French skills were not strong enough, or the lack of suitable French courses at the university. (Canadian Council on Learning, 2008, p. 6)

This suggested there was a potential for loss of French language capacity after high school. Further research by the Canadian Council on Learning indicated that 51 percent of French Immersion students who attend university take French – higher than those in core French. (Canadian Council on Learning, French Immersion in Canada, 2007, p. 8) What was not clear in the literature was how many of French Immersion graduates attend post-secondary in French, rather than taking French language courses in English institutions. This appeared to suggest that further study was warranted to explore French Immersion graduates post-secondary choices as well as the any possible continued impact of their second language study following high school. Unfortunately, information regarding French Immersion graduates in Manitoba is outdated, stemming from a survey of FI graduates in 1998/1999. At that time, many most of the French Immersion students that responded to this survey were attending university in Manitoba, however most of these were attending university in English: “...11% of respondents were registered at the Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface or its École technique et professionnelle. Among the reasons given for not continuing to study in French, the most frequent (14.1% of respondents) was the fact that some programs offer no French-language courses.” (Manitoba Education, Training and Youth. (2002). Survey of 1998 and 1999 French Immersion Graduates, p. 44). However, more recent information is needed in order to draw any

28

Final Report


further conclusions and to see if the current situation of French Immersion graduates in Manitoba is the same as it was fifteen years ago.

O. Conclusions from the Recent Research Certain themes emerged from an examination of the Canadian literature since 2006. These included:

Why families place their children in French Immersion Most frequently, families chose French Immersion because they believed it will provide greater future job opportunities for their children. To a lesser extent, French Immersion was chosen because of child care or transportation options. Concern over their ability to help their child(ren) with school work appeared to be the primary disincentive for families to choose French Immersion.

Who is enrolled in French Immersion The literature suggested that children from French/English bilingual households were more likely to be enrolled in French Immersion than were students from English-only homes. In addition, findings from the 2007 Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learning concluded that, on a national level, “...children enrolled in French-immersion programs tend to come from higher socio-economic backgrounds, although this pattern may not be characteristic of all provinces.” However, participation in French Immersion was not consistently correlated to parental educational attainment. Although data on gender and French Immersion enrolment are dated and require further review, information from 2000 suggested that more females than males are enrolled in French Immersion on a national level. Enrolment in FI was rising nationally, provincially, and within LRSD. The literature that addressed reasons for this rise was noticeably absent, however information in the popular press suggested this increase could be attributed to French Immersion graduates choosing this option for their children. In addition, it is suggested that immigration into Manitoba was contributing to increased FI enrolment.

French Immersion and newcomer or Allophone students Research from 2011 and 2012 found that Allophone students, those who speak neither French nor English as a first language, were being discouraged from participating in French Immersion. Nevertheless, the Canadian Council on Learning’s 2007 research confirmed that Allophone French Immersion students performed just as well as their English-speaking counterparts. In addition, Allophone parent/families valued learning both French and English. Therefore, the literature suggested that Allophone students are being discouraged in participating in FI due to misunderstanding and educator attitudes.

29

Final Report


French Immersion models and achievement The literature has established that age of entry into the program, degree of language instruction, total cumulative time spent in the target language and the pedagogical approach to language learning have been the variables that support students proficiency in language acquisition. In addition, studying in French did not affect students’ English language development. More recently, one researcher suggested that reinforcing language teaching in the ‘weaker’ or ‘newer’ language was also needed to achieve equity in bilingualism.

French Immersion in the inclusive classroom Much of the recent literature focused on whether or not studying a second language was appropriate for all learners. For some time, the work of Fred Genesee and others has indicated that students with academic challenges benefit from FSL learning and that this does not put them further at risk of poor academic success. This was also found to be true for students with language impairments or those who are struggling readers. A recent publication by Katy Arnott suggested that studying in two languages may support struggling learners, as good second language pedagogy also supports those who struggle in the first language. Therefore, an examination of the literature reveals there was no research evidence that students with special learning needs cannot be accommodated in French Immersion.

Student attrition from French Immersion Like all educational programming, there has been attrition in French Immersion, most commonly as students enter secondary. The literature suggests a number of possible reasons for this, including parents/families’ lack of confidence in their ability to support their child’s learning in French. In addition, it was also suggested that students who experience academic difficulties were being ‘counselled out’ of French Immersion, spurred on by the erroneous assumption that struggling students would be more successful in an English language program.

French Immersion and the professional environment There was a body of research that suggested teacher attrition has been an issue across the country and across different school programs. Manitoba has experienced a shortage of French Immersion and French minority language teachers. While some of the reasons teachers leave FI were inherent within the teaching profession as a whole, others were specific to second language learning, such as the lack of instructional materials and the challenge of working in a second language environment.

French Immersion students and post-secondary education. The literature suggested that approximately half of FI students attending university took course(s) in French. What was not clear in the literature was how many of French Immersion graduates attend post-secondary in French, rather than taking French language courses in

30

Final Report


English institutions. In addition, research from 2007/2008 suggested that students lost French language capacity after high school. Recent research and literature regarding French Immersion in Canada point to other areas of inquiry for Louis Riel School Division. Some questions that arise include:

Do LRSD families choose French Immersion because they believe it will benefit their children? What benefits may influence families’ choice of French Immersion?

Are LRSD FI students more likely to come from families in which French is regularly spoken?

What are the factors driving the increase in French Immersion enrolment in LRSD?

Do LRSD French Immersion students and families come from diverse backgrounds? These questions are explored in other areas of the French Immersion Review.

31

Final Report


-- DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS --

SURVEYS, FOCUS GROUPS, AND INTERVIEWS Consultation with key stakeholders involved surveys, focus groups and interviews of LRSD French Immersion staff, students, and parents/caregivers. The reach of the Review suggests a high level of confidence in the findings, as web survey response rates were high (78% for staff, 82% for students, and 60% for parents/families) and findings were corroborated by interviews and focus groups. The findings from these methods have been organized thematically according to the areas of inquiry for the Review.

A. Key Stakeholder Characteristics

1. Staff

Overall, 343 individuals responded to the staff survey, a response rate of 78%. Of those who responded, 78% were female and 20% were male (2% preferred not to answer). Over 60% of the respondents were classroom teachers (Table 1).

* Percentages do not add up to 100% due to rounding.

Individuals were most likely to be working at the Early Years (K-4) level (Graph 1).

Table 1

Current Assignment for Individuals Completing Web

Survey*

Current Assignment (%)

Classroom Teacher including Phys.Ed., Music 62% Administrator 6% Teacher in a Support Role e.g., Resource, Counselor, Librarian

13%

Educational Assistant 11% Support Staff (e.g., Secretary, Library Technician, Custodian, Computer Lab Assistant)

9%

Total 100%

41%

25%

8%

22%

3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Early K-4

Middle 5-8

Early/Middle K-8/9

Mid/High 7-12

Other

Graph 1Grade Levels Responsibilities

32

Final Report


A total of 32 staff members participated in focus groups in the four schools, 23 of whom were female. Focus group participants worked in a variety of roles most often as a classroom teacher (Table 2). Focus group participants had a range of experience in French Immersion, from those who were in their first year of teaching to those having 30 years of experience. While most had only worked in Louis Riel School Division, a few had worked in other school divisions, and some individuals had taught in dual track schools.

2. Students

Survey

Overall, 1855 students completed the web survey, a response rate of 82%. Females (54%) were more likely than their male peers (41%) to complete the survey. (Five percent preferred not to indicate their gender). Students were most likely to rate themselves as either “average” (61%) or “above average” (35%) students.

Approximately one-third of students were either at the Grades 5-6 or the Grades 9-12 level (Graph 2) Almost all students (92%) indicated they most often speak English at home, while 3% speak French. Students (77%) reported that someone else in their home/family speaks French. It was interesting to note that 5% of students reported most often speaking neither English nor French at home.

Table 2:

Staff Focus Group Participants by Role

Role Number of

Participants

Classroom Teacher 18 Student Services Teacher 5 School Administrator 4 Specialist Teacher 3 Educational Assistant 2 Total 32

35%

30%

35%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Grades 5-6 Grades 7-8 Grades 9-12

Graph 2 Students' Grade Levels

33

Final Report


Interviews and Focus Group

A total of 26 students were involved in pair interviews and the student focus group, 14 of whom were male. All except one (who entered French Immersion in Grade 1) had been in French Immersion since Kindergarten. Thirteen students were in Grade 6, six were in Grade 8 and seven were in Grade 12.15 During the interviews and the focus group, six students identified that they had family members that spoke French, three of these students mentioned that their family member spoke French fluently or was of French-speaking heritage. Three volunteered that their parents had been immersion students, while five indicated they had older siblings that were in currently attending French Immersion in LRSD. Finally, three students indicated they had a family member that spoke languages other than English or French.

3. Parents/Guardians16

Overall, 1216 parents completed the web survey, a response rate of 60%. These individuals were most likely to indicate their oldest child currently enrolled in French Immersion was female (53%). Parents most frequently reported their child being in Early Years (Graph 3). This is not surprising, as the literature indicates parental engagement in their child(ren)’s

education is highest among families with children in early years and drops off as their children get older. While almost all parents (95%) most often speak English at home, five percent most often speak a language at home that is neither English nor French. Almost half of parents (49%) reported that someone else in their family/home speaks French. These parents were most likely to indicate that their spouse/partner (29%), their child’s grandparent(s) (19%) or other relatives (18%) spoke French.

15 Students in Grades 6, 8, and 12 were selected for participation in interviews and focus groups

because they were the oldest student in elementary, middle years, or secondary. Because of this, they would have the longest exposure to French Immersion in LRSD and would be best able to answer questions about their experiences.

16 Throughout the document parents refers to both parents and/or guardians.

51%

36%

13%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%50%

60%

70%

80%

Early K-4 Middle 5-8 High 9-12

Graph 3Child's Grade Levels

34

Final Report


B. Reasons for Enrolment

Parents most often enroll their child in French Immersion to enable them to effectively communicate in English and French, to augment their job opportunities and to add to their linguistic skills (Table 3). These reasons were also most likely to be viewed as being “very important” by parents.

Conversely, parents were least likely to suggest the integration of newcomers into Canadian society (5%), the appreciation of different cultures (26%), or a broadened understanding of the world (32%) were reasons for enrolling their child in FI. Staff participating in the focus groups believed families chose French Immersion for their children for a variety of reasons: “…over the years it’s evolved to be very inclusive of everyone. People bring their kids for French Immersion for many reasons and what ends up is that we have a multitude of different abilities” (Staff). This plurality of reasons why families chose FI has increasingly diversified the French Immersion student population. Staff described their schools as including more newcomers and those who struggle academically. While staff believed the Division was providing resources to support this diversity, they also believed that more could be done to ensure that all families and student felt they could enroll in French Immersion and succeed in the program. Staff also believed that the population in French Immersion in LRSD may be growing because immersion graduates are choosing this option for their children.

Twenty-three percent of parents completing the web survey had attended a French Immersion school. They were most likely to do so when at the elementary and/or middle/junior high levels (Table 4). Few parents went to a French university/college (n=35). They were more likely to take French courses at

Table 3

Reasons for Enrolling Child in French Immersion

Top 3

Reason (%)

Able to effectively communicate in French and English when s/he graduates from FI program

75%

French Immersion increases future job opportunities 72% French Immersion provides the opportunity to add to their linguistic skills/acquire another language

60%

Table 4

Parents Who Attended FI School by Level

(n=284)

FI School Level Number (%)

Elementary 234 82% Middle/Junior High 221 78% High School 179 63% French University/College 35 12% English University/College completed some French courses

82 29%

Immersion graduates are putting their children in immersion. That speaks a lot to the program. It is expanding because of the experience of people now putting their children in the program…We have students in this school now whose parents went to this school. (Staff)

35

Final Report


an English University/College (29%). Furthermore, 61% of parents indicated they have used French in their working lives since leaving French Immersion.

During interviews and the focus group, all students indicated they had attended French Immersion from the beginning of their school journeys, meaning that the decision to enroll in FI was made for them by their families. Most indicated their families chose French Immersion in the belief that it would provide opportunities and advantages in the future: « Mes parents voulaient que j’apprends le français parce qu’ils n’ont pas eu ce privilege »17 (Student). Students spoke of how their families’ believed it would provide them with better job opportunities in the future.

Interestingly, a few staff who participated in focus groups had graduated from French Immersion and these individuals believed that the program has provided them with increased job opportunities:

I have experienced many job opportunities because I spoke a second language and even a third. I appreciate that my parents put me into the French Immersion program; it gave me so many more opportunities than my friends who just went through the English program (Staff).

Those completing the web survey supported this notion. Increased employment opportunities in the future were seen as being important and an expected outcome from enrolment in French Immersion. Staff completing the survey believed it is “very important” (71%) or “important” (27%) that French Immersion increases students’ future job opportunities. Students (81%) and parents (83%) also believed that French Immersion will help to get a job later in life.

C. Goals of French Immersion

1. Achieving Bilingualism Students believed that French Immersion provided them with opportunities not available to other students. Almost all students indicated they wanted to be bilingual by the time they graduated high school, and felt they could achieve this goal: « Être bilingue c’est important pour moi »18 (Student). During the focus groups, some staff also believed that students could achieve

17 Quotations are reported in the language in which they were collected. Students were given the

opportunity to respond in the language of their choice, and most frequently chose to respond in French. “My parents wanted me to learn French because they did not have this privilege.” (Translations of French quotations throughout this document are by Proactive Information Services.)

18 “Being bilingual is important for me.”

I think it is a good opportunity. My family is English and Chinese and learning French would open things up. I would have better job opportunities and be able to go to different places. My parents wanted me to have a challenge that would help with my future employment. (Student)

36

Final Report


bilingualism by the time they graduate. These educators also believed that being bilingual would provide students with better job prospects in the future: “In Canada, it is bilingual. The students can have more prospects later on for their careers” (Staff). While staff focus group participants agreed that one of the goals of French Immersion was to achieve bilingualism, a few believed this goal was not achieved for all students: “We say that our graduates are bilingual and that’s just a lie” (Staff). While these individuals affirmed that the LRSD model provided students with support in achieving language proficiency, they also believed that there were some graduates that did not achieve sufficient fluency to be considered bilingual. However, students (81%) and parents (84%) believe students will have the ability to communicate effectively in both languages upon graduation. Furthermore, as noted on the survey, all staff (100%) believed it is important for students to be able to communicate effectively in English and French upon graduation.

2. Learning About Other Languages and Cultures When asked, students also believed that French Immersion had provided them with an increased ability to acquire other languages: “I think it developed the part of my brain that learns languages” (Student). This was echoed by staff, who also believed that French Immersion has helped students acquire languages with facility: “…[I] teach [another language] and I know that teaching kids have already learned a second language is pretty easy. They pick it up. They've done it once before” (Staff). This perception was reinforced on the staff survey where all staff believed that it was either “very important” (74%) or “important” (25%) for French immersion to provide students with the opportunity to add to their linguistic skills. During a focus group, staff spoke of how they believed FI provided students with an opportunity to have a deeper understanding of other cultures. One staff member spoke from her/his own experience:

To me, it emphasizes an appreciation of different cultures. I lived in the States for many years and there are a lot of Spanish speakers there but, on the whole, the western population, they don't emphasize languages in other cultures. It's like a desert of appreciation of other cultures. People don't travel and learning a second language is not that common down there. So to me it helps our appreciation, our children's appreciation, of the world at large (Staff).

Staff outlined their belief that FI provided students with increased opportunities. They spoke of how learning French might provide them with more opportunities for travel. This was echoed by students. During the focus group, students spoke of their opportunities to travel to Quebec and

Students (81%) and parents (84%) believe students will have the ability to communicate effectively in both languages upon graduation. Furthermore, all staff (100%) believed it is important for students to be able to communicate effectively in English and French upon graduation.

37

Final Report


France that were provided by the school. However, students also indicated they believed that FI helped; “You just understand that there’s more cultures than just the one you’re living in” (Student). These perceptions were supported by the survey results. Almost all staff believed French Immersion helps students to appreciate different cultures (96%) and broadens their understanding of the world (96%). Furthermore, according to students, their experiences in French Immersion have helped them to; understand the world around them (79%), be more understanding of others (74%), be helpful to others in their community (74%). It has also sparked their interest to travel to French-speaking parts of the world (69%). Similar to students, parents believed experiences in French Immersion have helped their child respect other cultures (80%), understand the world around them (73%) and be more understanding of others (65%). They were less likely to view French Immersion as helping their child develop a sense of social responsibility (49%). (It should be noted that 32% of parents reported “don’t know” for this question.) Overall, about half of the parents (48%) believed French Immersion has sparked an interest in their child to travel to French-speaking parts of the world. However, as one might expect, parents (62%) with children in high school were most likely to indicate their child has an interest in travel to French-speaking parts of the world.

D. French Immersion in LRSD

1. The ‘Total Immersion’ Model19 During focus groups, staff affirmed the ‘total immersion’ model in Louis Riel School Division. Generally, staff in all focus groups believed that LRSD’s model of having schools that were devoted exclusively to French Immersion programming was a strength, and that this model contributed to a more ‘authentic’ immersion experience: “…whatever we do inside and outside the classroom is in French” (Staff). Staff indicated that having announcements and all hallway posters and printed materials in French contributed to an increased exposure to the language: “We live in French. We communicate in French and the students feel that” (Staff). Staff believed this model provided students with more opportunities to hear and speak in French, thus leading to students achieving a higher level of second language acquisition.

19 The terms ‘total immersion’ and ‘single track immersion’ are used interchangeably in this report.

The concept of immersion is to immerse oneself. If it is not a full immersion school, it is like immersing yourself in a puddle. Yeah, you get wet, but you aren’t going to be going swimming. I think that’s why this model is effective because you get the full experience. There is a requirement, a necessity that comes about, rather than ‘I can speak English to my teachers because some of them are only English speakers.’ In our system, the culture and environment of the school is that the experience is a full immersion experience (Staff)

38

Final Report


During interviews and the focus group, some students commented on the model of French Immersion they had experienced in LRSD. Although most students had only experienced the ‘total immersion’ model as it exists in Louis Riel School Division, they believed this model helped foster French language learning: « Je pense que c’est mieux d’avoir une école qui est toute en français. On parle l’anglais à la maison et dans la communauté. Dans notre pays, il y a le français et l’anglais, et c’est bien d’avoir les deux »20 (Student). Some staff did have experience with dual track schools. These individuals shared their impressions during focus groups:

I used to work in a dual track school and came to this division because I wanted to work in this model. I found that it was hard to encourage students to speak French in the dual track school because they would get nicknames and stuff like that for speaking French. So they just wouldn’t, especially in Grades 7 and 8. At that time [age], they were trying to assert their independence and it was embarrassing. Having that French milieu really encourages them to speak French. Although there were four French teachers in the dual track school, we felt we couldn’t speak French in the staff room because we would be shunned. The English teachers always thought we were talking about them, which wasn’t true. We were just talking about our work, and that was natural to speak French, but we didn’t because of this. So knowing what it was like for an adult, think of what it was like for the kids (Staff).

This individual spoke of a division in the dual track school in which s/he worked prior to coming to LRSD. The model reduced the school’s ability to create an environment where French was valued. Staff also highlighted that students in LRSD French Immersion schools were “…all in the same boat” (Staff). Dual track schools were also described as providing “…lots of distractions in English and making it easier for students and staff to slip over to English” (Staff). As a result, staff believed the increased exposure to French provided by LRSD’s model fostered increased language learning: “I decided at that point that I was going to teach only in an immersion centre because I saw a huge difference in the quality of the French that the students were able to speak in and understand” (Staff). One student interviewed had attended a dual track school prior to his/her experience in LRSD: “I went to a dual track and there is a difference. The French Immersion [in LRSD] is smaller and there is more French communication than in dual track…More French is an advantage. In dual track, we weren’t encouraged to speak French as much” (Student). However, this student also shared that his/her parents worried that moving from a dual track to a total immersion school would mean a decline in the level of English language instruction their child would receive.

20 “I think that it is better to have a school that is all in French. We speak English at home and in the

community. In our country, there is French and English, and it is good to have them both.”

39

Final Report


Other students shared stories of comparing LRSD’s ‘total immersion’ model with dual track in which they affirmed their preference for this model.

I think it allows us to be better immersed in the language and it helps us learn it -- pick it up quicker. 'Cause I know my cousins…live in Ontario and they go to a French immersion that's dual track and speaking with them in French, their French isn't as strong as a lot of the students here. Because all their announcements and everything, they're done in English, so they're not as exposed to it as we are here. So, they don't pick it up as much. (Student)

Students believed that the LRSD model provided them with more exposure to French which they felt provided them with a better opportunity to acquire French skills. In addition, one focus group participant shared another view on why she valued a ‘total immersion’ model. Students discussed how a dual track school creates an environment of ‘them and us,’ which doesn’t lead to cohesion. Therefore, both students and educators believed that LRSD’s model of French Immersion created cohesion within the school.

Staff also believed that there was a commitment to a quality French Immersion program on the part of the Division. During focus groups, staff were thankful for those at the Board Office that spoke French and believed these people better understood their needs:

…our division is one of the very few who have an assistant superintendent that is fluently bilingual. We have coordinators at the Board Office and other staff that speak French…We are able to have some meetings in French and there are some clinicians who speak French…it is a very real priority in our division. They put a lot of emphasis and importance on that at the divisional level (Staff).

Staff also spoke of the Division supporting them by paying for language classes in order to maintain and improve their level of French. Finally, a number of staff members mentioned wanting to come to LRSD because of the Division’s commitment to the ‘total immersion’ model: “…this is why we gravitate to this school division” (Staff). These individuals spoke of working in dual track settings in other school divisions and indicated they came to LRSD because they wanted to teach in the ‘total immersion’ setting. In addition, one staff members pointed out that LRSD’s commitment to FI fostered the recruitment of professionals: “I think we are able to recruit some of the better teachers and then that, of course, has an impact on student learning” (Staff). One staff member shared an experience during the focus group where s/he believed the experience of FI in LRSD

I have a friend. She goes to [school name] where they have French and English. And she says the people in the English side, they don't even talk to the people on the French side. That's weird to me 'cause like we all talk. We're all in the same boat kind of

thing. (Student)

40

Final Report


was similar to the francophone school system in which she had been educated: “I think it is the closest thing to the French School Division” (Staff).

2. French Instruction Students were more likely to believe they can speak (79%) and read (77%) French well, compared to their ability to write it (69%). Females (83%) were more likely than males (76%) to indicate they can speak French well. Females (72%) were also more likely than their male peers (68%) to express confidence in their writing ability. Similar to students, parents were least likely to believe their child write French well (58%). However, they expressed more confidence in their child’s ability to speak (80%) and read (72%) French. While approximately the same percentage of students and parents believed they or their child spoke French well, students more frequently believed they wrote and read French well than did parents. However, parental perceptions of linguistic ability varied by the grade level of their child (Table 5). Perceived ability to write, read and speak French appears to increase with grade level. Staff affirmed that language learning was a major goal of the French Immersion program in LRSD, while also stating they believed the ‘total immersion’ model was a support to language acquisition: “I think this model does very, very well in teaching our students to learn French and apply it day to day” (Staff). During interviews, students spoke of the efforts their teachers made to foster their success in French learning: “In Grades 1 and 2, we all wanted to speak English and our teachers worked hard to make us speak French” (Student) Another student echoed these remarks: « Les profs veulent que l’on apprenne »21 (Student).

21 “The teachers want us to learn.”

Table 5

Parent Perceptions Regarding Child’s Ability

Ability K-4

(%)

5-8

(%)

9-12

(%)

Overall

Writes French well 41% 74% 79% 58% Reads French well 58% 87% 86% 72% Speaks French well 72% 87% 89% 80%

41

Final Report


Almost all staff (99%) reported that a variety of teaching methods are used to meet student learning needs. In addition, staff (98%) believe there are high expectations held for student performance (Table 6). Students

(90%) and parents (85%) believe there are high expectations for their performance. While parents (91%) agree there are a variety of teaching methods used to meet the students’ learning needs, students were less likely to do so (80%). During the focus groups, a number of staff indicated that they were graduates of French Immersion themselves, some even indicating they had graduated from LRSD. One staff member with 30 years experience in LRSD observed:

We were just discussing that at an in-service last week. One of the things that has changed substantially over the past 10 years is the number of graduates from immersion that are teaching. Before we would have to go out of province to bring in people to teach. I’ve seen a huge turn around in the amount of immersion grads that are in the education system now. (Staff)

3. Attrition Louis Riel School Division provided data regarding the attrition in and out of French Immersion for the Division, other urban school divisions in Winnipeg, and the province as a whole for the ten year period from the 2004/2005 to 2014/2015 school years. The attrition in and out of French Immersion in LRSD is different when compared with that of the other urban school divisions in Winnipeg and the province as a whole. This information reveals that students transition into French Immersion most frequently in Grade 1 in LRSD, as well as in other urban school divisions and the province as a whole. However, Louis Riel School Division’s Middle Immersion program provides another opportunity to attrition into the French Immersion program at Grade 4, while data from the other urban school divisions and the province do not indicate there are other points at which there is a net gain of students into the program.

Table 6

Perceptions Regarding Methods and Expectations

Staff

(%)*

Student

(%)

Parent

(%)

Teachers in this school use a variety of teaching methods to meet varying student learning needs

99% 80% 91%

Teachers in this school hold high expectations for students’ academic performance

98% 90% 85%

*Percentages are based on the combining the “strongly agree” and “agree” categories and with the “don’t know” responses excluded.

42

Final Report


Graph 4

In LRSD, as well as in the other urban school divisions and the province as a whole lose students out of French immersion at every subsequent grade level after Grade 1, with the previously notes exception of an influx of FI students in Grade 4 in LRSD.

Graph 5

However, the percentage of students who attrition out of French Immersion in Grades 2, 3, 5 and 6 is less in LRSD than in other urban school divisions or the province. The transition into Grade 7 is the point at which LRSD loses the most students out of French Immersion, and the percentage of students who transition out of FI is higher in LRSD than in other urban school divisions or the province. However, it is important to keep in mind that other school divisions have late entry French Immersion in Grade 7. While the percentage of students transitioning into these programs at this point is not provided, this is likely influences the relatively low level of attrition out of FI at Grade 7 outside LRSD.

43

Final Report


Graph 6

Finally, in other urban school divisions and the province as a whole the highest percentage attrition out of French Immersion occurs in Grades 9, 10, and 11. This is not the case in LRSD. Generally, the attrition pattern of students in and out of French Immersion in LRSD is different than other urban school divisions and the province, explained partly be the different access points for late French Immersion programs. During focus groups, staff suggested that attrition from French Immersion to the English program had decreased:

There used to be that idea out there that you had to study high school, especially in math and science, in English if they are going to university in English or else they [French Immersion students] won’t be able to cope in English university. So the families would transfer them to English for high school. But our graduates have proven that wrong. I think that mentality [among families] has changed quite a bit in the last dozen or so years. (Staff)

Nevertheless, during one focus group, staff indicated a number of students choose to attend high school in English. This was discussed as a ‘natural transition’ time for students to leave French Immersion in LRSD: “There’s the odd exception, but if it’s going to happen I think it happens between Grade eight and Grade nine” (Staff). However, some staff had received feedback from those who had made the transition to the English program: “…when we do have students who switch to the English school it’s often at the end of Grade 8…we still have very few. We’ve had feedback from parents saying ‘Yeah, they are still struggling in math whether it’s in English or French’” (Staff).

44

Final Report


4. A Positive Environment Staff described the environment in their schools as “a community” and believed students had a sense of cohesion and belonging. Students were also described as “engaged” and “proud.” Some indicated this was partly attributable to the model of French Immersion in LRSD, by having students who were all part of the program together in one school.

Overall, three-quarters of students (75%) reported being happy at their school. Additionally, students were proud of their school (70%) and enjoyed going to their school (70%). Students’ attitudes toward their schools varied by their grade level (Table 7). Those students in

Grades 5 and 6 were the most positive about all aspects.22 During the focus group, one student mentioned the smaller environment in LRSD’s French Immersion schools as an advantage for students:

I know my brother switched…to [school name] and he says…he's much more under the radar. The teachers aren't there looking out for him as much…. He definitely says it's easier at [school name] just because it's in English and they don't challenge you as much, but they're not there to help you succeed as much. (Student)

Another student mentioned that s/he felt safe at school: « Il y a pas de taxage. C’est un environment en sécurité »23 (Student).

5. Challenges Encountered Students articulated challenges they encountered as a result of being students in French Immersion. Some spoke of finding reading and writing in French difficult, while others identified gender agreement as challenging. It was frequently mentioned that parents/guardians are less able to provide assistance with school work:

22 According to information provided by Louis Riel School Division, these findings are similar to those

from the “Tell Them From Me” Secondary School Survey data for French Immersion schools (including Collège Béliveau, Collège Jeanne-Sauvé, École George McDowell, École Marie-Anne-Gaboury, and École Varennes). This report includes an aggregate indicator of five statements entitled “Positive Learning Environment.” While information is not provided on whether or not these were Likert questions or how this scale was aggregated or constructed, the data from this source reveals that students have similar views when it comes of a positive school environment.

23 “There is no bullying. It is a safe environment.”

Table 7

Student Attitudes Towards Their School by

Grade level

Attitude 5-6

(%)

7-8

(%)

9-12

(%)

I like coming to this school 79% 68% 64%

I am proud of this school 79% 66% 64% I am happy at this school 80% 71% 73%

45

Final Report


There's literally no French background. I think my mom studied French a little bit in school, but her French wasn't able to help me with later years. I kind of had to figure stuff out myself. I mean it's more of a challenge. I like the challenge, but sometimes it would have been nice just to go to my parents and say, "Hey, can you help me out with this?" (Student)

Secondary students indicated they found their families’ inability to help with math and science homework most challenging, while younger students identified challenges with dictée: « J’ai personne pour pratiquer mon dictée »24 (Student). When asked about how French Immersion schools might be able to respond to this challenge, one student proposed that math and science could be taught in English in order to allow families to be able to better support students in these subject areas. However, views were divided among students in the focus group as to whether this would be an appropriate way to address this issue. One staff member commented that some families feel that; “…if they [parents] don’t speak French, they feel they have nothing to offer” (Staff). Students interviewed also spoke of the challenge of having students in class that were not willing or keen on speaking French:

Il y a des étudiants qui sont en français parce que leurs parents les a mis là et ils veulent être en anglais. Ils ne parlent pas français en classe. C’est difficile de parler en français quand les autres ne parlent pas en français. Ils pensent que le français c’est « geeky » et ils parlent l’anglais avec leurs amis.25 (Student)

This challenged some students who felt this created a social environment in which French was not valued. Staff also indicated they felt there were students in FI that do not value French language instruction which creates a challenge unique to second language programming:

I have lot of other kids who don't give a flying you know what about French and those are the kids that I would like to see leave... . I think at this point it's really hard to leave 'cause you're leaving your friends... then for a lot of kids it's shut down. And they say as far as French is concerned, ‘That is not me. That is outside of who I am.’ (Staff)

24 “I have no one with whom to practice my dictée.” 25 “There are students who are in French [Immersion] because their parents put them there and they

want to be in English. It is difficult to speak in French when others do not speak in French. They think that French is “geeky,” and they speak English with their friends.

I ran into someone I graduated with a couple of weeks ago. When he graduated I was convinced he didn't even understand French. And his French is better than mine now. Two years later he was going to university in French. He began to see the value of it. He went to Quebec and did some stuff in Quebec or Ottawa or in that area and his French is fantastic now. So, sometimes it takes a little time for them to realize the importance, but had he not gone to immersion...there would have been no option for that (Staff)

46

Final Report


Working with students who may not be motivated to study in French presented challenges for both staff and students. Nevertheless, educators also re-iterated that students may value learning in French later on in life and will likely retain their French comprehension even if their speaking and writing skills do not remain strong. Staff indicated that LRSD’s French Immersion model makes it challenging for students to pursue trades. Students who make a choice to pursue studies at the Arts and Technical Centre or at Manitoba Institute of Trades and Technology can still continue to take courses in a French Immersion setting, however the trades aspect of their study is in English. Staff felt this reality created a situation in which FI students who were pursuing vocational studies were not benefiting as much as those who were staying in a FI academic setting: “...logistically there are definitely some limitations” (Staff). Another staff member reinforced this perception by noting that some students would benefit from being able to access co-op programs more easily within French Immersion. Staff would like to see more opportunities for French Immersion students to be able to have access to specialized programs while still continuing in French “...our grade sevens and eights, they go to shops and cooking and that’s all in English. If they want to participate in the LEAP program, that’s in English” (Staff).

In comparison, staff (50%) completing the web survey believed that French Immersion students have equal access to optional courses while in high school (Graph 7). In contrast, over a quarter of staff (28%) did not believe FI students have equal access to optional courses, while almost a quarter did not know. While parents (41%) agreed that students in French Immersion have equal access to optional courses while in high school, almost half did not know.

Accessing resources in the community that are available in French also posed some challenges: “Sometimes you have to sacrifice language for expertise” (Staff). Nevertheless, other staff observed the number of activities available in French in the community had grown,

50%

41%

28%

14%

22% 45%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Staff Parents

Graph 7Staff & Parent Perceptions Regarding FI Students

having Equal Access to Optional Courses

Don't Know

Disagreement

Agreement

...when we send them to a trades program that they can do it for a semester, but it’s in English (Staff)

47

Final Report


which supported immersion and provided more varied activities for FI students. Educators also spoke of the lack of resources specific to immersion and that French first language resources were not always suitable. Educators would like to see material specifically designed for French Immersion.

E. French Immersion Students in LRSD

1. Family Backgrounds

Staff indicated that parents who were themselves educated in French Immersion are choosing this option for their children, and spoke of knowing this by having spoken with parents and families. In addition, staff believed a number of students came from a French language heritage. Staff further explained that FI schools in St. Boniface and St. Vital neighbourhoods had students of francophone heritage: “...we have lots of students whose last name is French. They have some French

ancestors. It is not always a parent who can speak French...a lot of times its a grandparent. That is an asset to your schools” (Staff). Staff went on to explain that having students in their classrooms; “...who can understand some French and speak a little bit of French is quite encouraging for the others” (Staff). Almost all students (92%) indicated they most often speak English at home, while 3% speak French. It was interesting to note that 5% of students reported most often speaking neither English nor French at home. Students (77%) reported that someone else in their home/family speaks French, 81% of whom indicated their sister/brother, mother (40%), father (30%), or grandparent (33%) spoke French. Almost all parents (95%) most often speak English at home. Five percent of parents most often speak a language at home that is neither English nor French. However, 49% of parents reported that someone else in their family/home speaks French. These parents were most likely to indicate that their spouse/partner (52%), grandparents (38%) or other relatives (36%) spoke French. Several students mentioned they had family members that spoke multiple languages, ranging from Mandarin, to Tagalog, to Italian. One student explained: “My mom speaks multiple languages and I feel like she understood the importance of learning another language just to open up to different cultures” (Student).

A lot of our students have French in their history that they might have lost over the generations and they're kind of taking that back...some of them will speak to one grandparent in French. That's the one connection they have to French outside of school. (Staff)

48

Final Report


Louis Riel School Division also receives community population data through Baragar Systems, more of which is reported in the following chapter. However, one community population

indicator reported is the percentage of the each school’s catchment population where the home language is not English (Table 8). This information suggests that the communities served by French Immersion and English Language schools have approximately the same percentage of the community population whose home language is not English, although the average percent is slightly higher for French Immersion schools. This echoes information collected through this Review which suggests that the communities serviced by French Immersion and English Language schools have similar populations. Finally, during the focus groups it arose that staff believed there is a higher level of parental involvement in their schools, when compared to LRSD English language schools. They also indicated that while many families supported students’ learning in French Immersion schools, this was not true of all families.

2. Gender Findings from the web surveys indicate parents do not believe that French Immersion is better suited to a particular gender. When questioned, 69% did not believe that FI is better suited to female students (24% did not know). School staff held similar beliefs in that 83% did not believe French Immersion is better suited to female students (11% indicated they did not know). Nevertheless, enrolment data from LRSD for the 2014/2015 school year revealed there were more females than males enrolled in French Immersion. In all LRSD French Immersion schools, 54% of the population is female and 46% is male. It is almost exactly the reverse for LRSD English Language schools, where 47% of the population is female and 53% of the population is male (Table 9). Therefore irrespective of school, there are more females than males enrolled in French Immersion in Louis Riel School Division.

Table 8

Percentage Population in the Community – Home Language Not

English by Type of School

Community Population Data

for…

Home Language Not English

Range Average

LRSD French Immersion Schools 8.5% to18.6% 12.3%

LRSD English Language Schools 3.8% to 26.6% 11.8%

In LRSD French Immersion 54% of the population is female and 46% is male, while in English Language schools it is 47% female and 53% male.

49

Final Report


Table 9

School Enrolment by Gender for FI and English Language Schools 2014-2015

Males Females Total

School Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Collège Béliveau 292 47% 329 53% 621 100% Collège Jeanne-Sauvé 272 45% 336 55% 608 100% École George McDowell 144 43% 194 57% 338 100% École Guyot 177 48% 188 52% 365 100% École Henri-Bergeron 96 47% 108 53% 204 100% École Howden 185 44% 231 56% 416 100% École Julie-Riel 156 46% 184 54% 340 100% École Marie-Anne-Gaboury 189 48% 202 52% 391 100% École Provencher 64 49% 66 51% 130 100% École Saint-Germain 204 47% 228 53% 228 100% École Van Belleghem 135 46% 160 54% 295 100% École Varennes 144 45% 173 55% 317 100% FI Schools Total 2,058 46% 2,399 54% 4,457 100%

Archwood School 88 53% 79 47% 167 100% Dakota Collegiate 653 58% 481 42% 1,134 100% Darwin School 124 58% 91 42% 215 100% Dr. D.W. Penner School 63 57% 48 53% 111 100% Frontenac School 307 54% 265 46% 572 100% General Vanier School 128 56% 100 44% 228 100% Glenlawn Collegiate 670 54% 574 46% 1,244 100% Glenwood School 89 65% 48 35% 137 100% H.S. Paul School 225 54% 188 46% 413 100% Hastings School 141 59% 100 41% 241 100% Highbury School 230 53% 203 47% 433 100% Island Lakes Community School 268 52% 250 48% 518 100% J.H. Burns Collegiate 395 52% 360 48% 755 100% Lavallee School 75 50% 76 50% 151 100% Louis Riel Arts & Tech. Centre 63 36% 110 64% 173 100% Marion School 69 53% 61 47% 130 100% Minnetonka School 88 55% 71 45% 159 100% Nelson McIntyre Collegiate 139 54% 117 46% 259 100% Niakwa Place School 146 53% 132 47% 278 100% Nordale School 98 52% 89 48% 187 100% Samuel Burland School 238 52% 219 48% 457 100% Shamrock School 234 50% 231 50% 465 100% St. George School 182 51% 175 49% 357 100% Victor H.L. Wyatt School 125 48% 134 52% 259 100% Victor Mager School 188 52% 171 48% 359 100% Windsor Park Collegiate 248 53% 220 47% 468 100% Windsor School 82 49% 84 51% 166 100% English Language Schools Total 5,356 53% 4,677 47% 10,036 100%

While the percentage of females and males in French Immersion in LRSD fluctuates somewhat by grade, this fluctuation is not dramatic (Graph 8).

50

Final Report


Because these data are only available for the year 2013/2014, this only provides ‘a snapshot’ of enrolment by gender. Unfortunately, these data cannot provide information as to whether male or female students attrition out of French Immersion at the same or different rates. Furthermore, data regarding enrolment by gender is not available from other urban school divisions in Winnipeg or the province of Manitoba as a whole. LRSD’s higher percentage of female students in French Immersion does reflect what was discovered in the literature. However, the caution stated in the literature review should be re-stated here, namely that this literature is dated and not well sourced.

3. French Immersion Populations

Staff described the populations of their schools during focus groups in various ways. Some staff believed their school populations were “diverse,” while others viewed their student population as largely homogeneous. There was a general feeling among staff focus group participants that there were more students who spoke neither French nor English in English schools than in FI schools.

However, there also was a belief that the English schools were better equipped to deal with allophone students, as they were more familiar with EAL programming. Another educator explained that the LRSD model may also contribute to fewer allophone students in FI:

53% 53% 55%51% 51%

56%50%

56% 56%50%

57% 55% 55%

46% 46% 45%49% 49%

44%50%

44% 44%50%

43% 45% 45%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Graph 8Percentage Male and Female French Immersion

Enrolment by Grade in LRSD (2013-2014)

Males

Females

If you go down the street to [an English school in LRSD] -- I talked to a guy who teaches English there and he said they added it up and there are kids are coming to the school with 47 different languages. (Staff)

51

Final Report


For us, the majority of our students enter in Kindergarten. We do have students in kindergarten and Grade one who don't have French or English, but it would be rare that a student shows up in Grade six with neither French nor English just because that expectation. If you're joining our immersion [program] -- you can join our middle immersion program, however, in our immersion schools the entry point is Kindergarten or Grade one. That might impact the number of students in the older grades who maybe would want to join immersion, but don't. (Staff)

During the focus groups, secondary school staff indicated they did not see many students who spoke neither French nor English: “We don’t see a lot of students who don’t speak French or English, so far. That might be changing with the immigration picture in the Manitoba demographic” (Staff). This suggests the possibility that allophone families arriving into LRSD are not choosing French Immersion for their children. Generally, school staffs believed that their populations were quite culturally and socially homogeneous. This appears to be consistent with data from Baragar Systems (and reported in Table 10 in the following section of this report) that indicates the average percentage of students receiving EAL funding in French Immersion is lower than the percentage in English Language schools. However, these data are limited to those students who receive funding as EAL learners and may not reflect the entire population that struggle with English as an Additional Language. Nevertheless, some educators in Kindergarten in Grade 1 did speak of having students who spoke neither English nor French. While they indicated these students did struggle somewhat in their classrooms they also believed that allophone students in these early years were not significantly disadvantaged: “[They] are still learning all the words just like the other kids were in French” (Staff). One staff member said: “Their English is learned very quickly [for those who don’t speak English when they enter school in Kindergarten or Grade 1]. They learn it on the street…by osmosis” (Staff). In fact, educators suggested that French Immersion offered advantages to allophone students that they would not otherwise have in an English program. They believed that their expertise in second language learning provided a good grounding for how to address the needs of students who spoke neither English nor French:

It [French Immersion] is about immersing them in the language and having a lot of very rich [experiences]... singing songs and poems and rhythm and having activities, repeating, images, and actions. That's how we teach French Immersion as being very expressive and modeling, repeating, saying [things]...and really physically doing it. We're very animated people. We have to be so the kids can understand us.

Educators felt these methods would be helpful to those acquiring more than one language at a time and that French Immersion had a lot to offer allophone students. Furthermore, staff (84%) believed in the importance of French Immersion in helping newcomers integrate into Canadian society.

52

Final Report


Staff (78%) completing the web survey, did not believe students in French Immersion families are from high socio-economic status families. Additionally, they believe (92%) that French Immersion is accessible to students from all socio-economic backgrounds. Parents (53%) do not believe French Immersion families are from higher socio-economic backgrounds. (Twenty-nine percent of parents did not know.) As well, parents (81%) believe French Immersion is accessible to students from all socio-economic backgrounds (13% percent did not know). Further discussion of the socio-economic characteristics of the communities served by LRSD French Immersion and English Language schools is included in the following chapter.

4. Struggling Learners Staff spoke of how the French Immersion student population was including more struggling learners:

We are seeing more and more students, Level II and III, who may be struggling in French Immersion. Do we have the same numbers as in the English schools – no, but we are seeing them more and more. The resources to get them to continue in French Immersion are growing. It is good for immersion, that we are not seen as much of an elitist program. If anyone wants to be in the program, they can succeed. (Staff)

While staff agreed the French Immersion student population was not as diverse as those in the English program schools, they did agree that learners taking French Immersion were becoming more diverse. Educators explained that they believed the growing diversity may be due to struggling learners choosing to stay in French Immersion. Baragar Systems provides some data regarding school populations that can inform discussion regarding struggling learners in French Immersion in LRSD. These data include the percentage of each school’s population that receive Level II and Level III funding, which is described as the percentage of the school’s population that are labeled “special education” (Table 10).

In LRSD, 92% of French Immersion staff and 81% of parents believe that the program is accessible to students from all socio-economic backgrounds.

There was a time when if a student was struggling in immersion, the solution is to remove them and put them in the English program. But I think that now we have realized that if a student is struggling in immersion, they are going to struggle in the English program. That helps people overcome the fact that it is not the immersion program that is causing the struggle. What is more important is that inclusion, [being in] that community and staying with their peers. I think this opens up immersion to more families. They won’t think that their child will have difficulties, so if we put them in the English program, it will be more suitable (Staff)

53

Final Report


These data indicate that the percentage of students who receive Level II and III funding is lower from in LRSD French Immersion schools (0.8%) than in English Language program schools (5.7%). In addition, French Immersion schools (2.2%) in LRSD have a lower percentage of students who receive funding as English as an Additional Language learners than do English Language program schools (11.2%) in the Division. However, it is important to keep in mind that these indicators only include students who are funded Level II and III and funded as EAL learners, and that schools generally acknowledge that there are many more ‘struggling learners’ in their populations who do not meet the requirements to receive funding. Educators also believed that there has been a shift in families’ perspectives of immersion in recent years. They spoke of how they believed families better understood that all students could succeed in French Immersion and more were choosing this option: “…now we do have a much more diverse clientele. It is not just the high achieving families that are selecting immersion” (Staff). During the focus groups, staff indicated it was very positive that struggling learners continue in FI and not migrate to the English program, as these students were just as likely to struggle in an English environment. In addition: “Some may still have difficulties as they would have in the English school, but they have the benefit of having two languages” (Staff). In fact, staff emphasized that French Immersion can provide a place where struggling students can have success:

We'll see parents who will take them [their child(ren)] out of immersion because they think ‘this is just too much for my child’. So they move them to an English track and the problems don't go away. The problems are still there. And sometimes the kids might be struggling in math... or some of the behaviours, but they're shining in the French. They speak French so that's where they're feeling successful. It would really be a big mistake to move them to an English track thinking that the math is easier in English. We try to support them - and then sometimes at the end of the day the parents still to move them (Staff).

Table 10

Percentage Population in the Community – Home Language Not English by Type of School

School Population Characteristic French Immersion English Language

Range Average Range Average

Special Education* 0.3% to 2.3% 0.8% 0.0% to 12.4% 5.7%

English as an Additional Language** 0.2% to 4.7% 2.2%*** 1.2% to 42.2% 11.2%

*This only includes students who receive Level II and III funding. **This only includes students who receive funding as English as an Additional Language learners. ***This average is based on 11 FI schools, as this data is not available for École George McDowell.

54

Final Report


When asked about supports for struggling learners, staff in focus groups indicated: “We make adaptations just like the English schools and make a learning behaviour plan” (Staff). Staff completing the web survey supported some aspects of the focus groups discussion. For example, staff (76%) believe French Immersion is suitable for students with special learning needs and do not believe (67%) low achieving students are better suited for other programs. However, staff are split in their opinions regarding the suitability of French Immersion for students having literacy challenges in their first language (53% believe it is suitable, while 38% do not). While staff (61%) believe there is not a lack of support for students experiencing social and emotional difficulties, one-third believe supports are lacking. Staff also expressed divergent views regarding the availability of support for teachers working with students with social and emotional difficulties. While 41% believe there is a lack of support for teachers, 50% believe supports are available. There is a similar split in staff perceptions regarding supports available for students with special learning needs and the teachers who work with them. While staff (44%) suggest supports for students are available, 33% believe they are lacking. Similarly, some staff (40%) suggest supports for teachers are available while over a third (36%) believe they are lacking. It should be noted that classroom teachers (25%) indicated they did not know about the availability of supports for students or teachers.

5. French in Students’ Lives

Students’ use of French in school and on the school grounds decreases by grade level (Table 11). Regardless of grade level, students were most likely to speak French with their teacher(s) and other school staff. They were least likely to speak French with other students and/or friends during breaks.

Furthermore, it appears that students rarely speak French outside of school or at home. Students (94%) reported speaking French infrequently (some of the time/hardly ever/never) with

Table 11

Settings in which Students Frequently* Speaking French by

Grade level

Attitude 5-6

(%)

7-8

(%)

9-12

(%)

In the classroom 64% 46% 27%

In school outside of classroom 31% 13% 3%

On school grounds 21% 15% 8%

With teacher outside of classroom 80% 79% 76%

With other school staff outside of the classroom 71% 70% 66% With other students/friends during breaks/ recess

13% 6% 2%

With other students/friends while in school 43% 24% 5% *Frequently is a combination of “all” and “most of the time” categories

55

Final Report


friends and/or other students outside of school. As well, students (92%) reported not regularly speaking French at home with their parents. According to students and parents, students are infrequent participants in activities that involve French. The activity most often reported by students (56%) and parents (73%) is reading stories written in French (56%) and writing notes, stories and letters in French (51%) (Table 12). Conversely, using social media (9%) and downloading French movies (9%) were least often reported by students as activities in which they frequently participate. Parents reported their child was an infrequent participant in many of the listed activities with the least often reported being; using social media (2%), volunteering in French community organizations (2%), and contributing/participating in blogs (2%).

6. Future Aspirations Almost all staff believe that French Immersion has helped students to become aware of occupations (90%) and educational options (96%) they otherwise would not have known. They also believe that French Immersion increases students’ post-secondary options (99%). Overall, parents (42%) agreed that French Immersion has helped their child find out about occupations about which they were not aware. (It was noted that 37% of parents indicated they did not know when asked this question). As one might expect, parental agreement to the question increased as grade level increased. Parents (56%) having a child(ren) in high school were most likely to believe French Immersion will increase their child’s occupational awareness. Similarly, parents (69%) were most likely to believe French Immersion has helped their child to find out about educational options they otherwise would not have had. Students (87%) believe that being in French Immersion has helped them to prepare for their next grade level. In addition, it has helped them to find out about jobs (77%) and educational options (80%) they did not know about. Students spoke of their aspirations for the future during interviews, with most indicating that they wanted to continue on to post-secondary. While some students did not know what course of study they would pursue, others stated they would pursue studies in English, while also taking

Table 12

Activities in which Students’ Frequently*

Participate in French

Top 5

Activity Student

(%)

Parents

(%)

Read stories in French 56% 73% Write notes, stories, and letters in French

51% 39%

Browse the internet and get information/visit sites in French

45% 21%

Participate in community events celebrating French culture

28% 29%

Listen to music in French 26% 25% * Frequently is a combination of “often” and “sometimes” categories.

56

Final Report


courses in French within an English post-secondary program. However, students completing the survey were not so sure of their future post-secondary plans. While 27% had plans to go to a French college/university, 42% were unsure. In addition, 39% believed they would take courses in French at an English college/university. Again, 42% were unsure of their future post-secondary plans. Students in Grades 5 and 6 were most likely to indicate plans to go to either a French college/university or to take course in French at an English college/university. Parents were unsure of their child’s post-secondary plans regarding attending a French college/university (69%) or taking French courses at an English college/university (72%). During the focus group students in Grade 12 shared their post-secondary plans. While some indicated they wanted to study in English post-secondary institutions, other wished they had the opportunity to continue their schooling in French: “If I had the choice I would go to Université de Saint-Boniface. That's the school I want to go to, but they don't offer the program I want. So, I have to go to U of M or a different English school which kind of sucks”. Another Grade 12 student spoke of plans to study in Paris stating: “I've been to Paris. I liked the culture there and I like French. And plus I know French, so that I can take school there and be able to communicate with the people in the city without having trouble”.

F. Future of French Immersion in LRSD Overall, two-thirds of students would recommend French Immersion to a friend while twenty-seven percent were unsure. Students (69%) in Grades 9 to 12 were most likely to recommend French Immersion to friends. The two most frequent reasons for recommending French Immersion included; “provides opportunities/opens doors/expands horizons/asset in later life” (n=200) and “increases job opportunities/advantage in the workplace” (n=193).

Student satisfaction was apparent, in that 93% reported being either “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with their experiences in French Immersion (Graph 9).

Parental satisfaction with their child’s experiences was also apparent in that 90% would recommend French Immersion to others. The most frequent reasons for recommending FI included; “[FI] provides opportunities/opens doors in later life” (n=235), “acquiring a language is good/a great skill/a gift/helps to acquire other

31%

62%

5%

2%Graph 9

Student Satisfaction with Their Experiences in French Immersion

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

49%

45%

4%

1%

Graph 10Parental Satisfaction with Their Child's

Experiences in French Immersion

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

57

Final Report


languages later on” (n=129), and “increases job opportunities/advantage in the workplace” (n=116). When questioned, almost all parents (94%) expressed their satisfaction with their child’s experiences in French Immersion.

Almost all staff (97%) would recommend French Immersion to someone considering it for their child. The reasons most often given for recommending French Immersion to others included; “[French Immersion] provides opportunities/opens doors/expands horizons/asset in later life” (n=90), “[FI] increases job opportunities/advantage in the workplace” (n=54), and “[FI] increases cultural understanding/broadens view of the world” (n=47). The likelihood of staff recommending French Immersion is not surprising given their satisfaction (99%) their experiences in FI.

67%

32%

1%

Graph 11Staff Satisfaction with Their

Experiences in French Immersion

Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Dissatisfied

31%49%

67%

62%45%

32%

5% 4% 1%2% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Students Parents Staff

Graph 12Satisfaction with Experiences in French Immersion by

Respondent Group

Very Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very Satisfied

58

Final Report


-- DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS --

LRSD COMMUNITY POPULATION DATA This chapter was based community population data provided by Louis Riel School Division, collected on September 30, 2014. All calculations and aggregation of these data was done by Baragar Systems.

A. Community Profiles In Louis Riel School Division, socio-economic risk characteristics of community populations vary greatly by school catchment area (Table 13). It is important to understand that these data refer to communities that make up the catchment of each of LRSD schools, and does not reference the socio-economic characteristics of the students enrolled in each of these schools.

Table 13

Community Profile Socio-economic Characteristics* by School Community

School Community Single

Parents

Labour

Force

Unemployed

Income

<$30,000

No High

School

Diploma

Transiency

Home

Language

Not

English

Collège Béliveau 24.7% 3.4% 9.8% 19.3% 10.1% 13.1% Collège Jeanne-Sauvé 25.9% 4.1% 11.3% 18.8% 11.2% 11.2% École George McDowell 20.7% 3.8% 6.0% 15.7% 8.9% 11.1% École Guyot 14.1% 3.4% 0.6% 18.2% 9.2% 10.3% École Henri-Bergeron 34.3% 4.4% 17.7% 22.1% 13.5% 18.6% École Howden 33.6% 2.0% 9.4% 21.2% 9.4% 10.7% École Julie-Riel 29.5% 4.4% 10.3% 20.0% 10.5% 10.7% École Marie-Anne-Gaboury 24.6% 4.0% 6.1% 16.4% 9.6% 8.5% École Provencher 34.3% 4.4% 17.7% 22.1% 13.5% 18.6% École Saint-Germain 15.0% 3.5% 2.3% 11.7% 8.0% 11.5% École Van Belleghem 15.3% 3.5% 2.6% 13.3% 6.2% 10.3% École Varennes 36.2% 4.5% 20.3% 25.8% 15.7% 13.0% FI Schools Average 25.7% 3.8 9.5% 18.7% 10.5% 12.3%

Archwood School 37.7% 7.1% 10.6% 22.2% 13.4% 10.8% Dakota Collegiate 23.5% 4.1% 10.4% 17.8% 11.4% 12.1% Darwin School 22.1% 2.1% 5.4% 13.9% 7.0% 8.4% Dr. Penner School 24.7% 4.4% 6.7% 18.6% 11.1% 11.7% Frontenac School 35.2% 1.8% 12.0% 22.7% 10.4% 10.8% General Vanier School 30.2% 2.6% 2.8% 18.2% 7.0% 10.7% Glenlawn Collegiate 28.0% 4.2% 11.6% 20.1% 11.3% 10.2% Glenwood School 30.9% 4.1% 4.8% 24.7% 13.3% 8.2% H S Paul School 21.5% 4.3% 3.9% 16.2% 12.2% 10.5% Hastings School 24.7% 3.9% 8.6% 18.3% 12.2% 9.8% Highbury School 9.6% 3.3% 1.8% 12.7% 7.6% 12.3%


Parents

Labour

Force

Income

<$30,000

No High

School Transiency

Home

Language

59

Final Report


Comparing the average percent of these indicators reveals only slight differences between the communities served by LRSD French Immersion schools and those served by the Division’s English Language schools. On average, communities served by French Immersion schools have a slightly lower percentage of the population that are single parent families, labour force unemployed, low income, have no high school diploma, and are transient. However, the catchment communities of English Language schools have a slightly lower percentage of their community population whose home language is not English. This suggests that when looking at the Division as a whole, the communities served by French Immersion schools have almost the same socio-economic characteristics as LRSD communities served by English Language schools. 1. Comparative Examples

In addition to looking at the Division as a whole, specific examples can provide another lens through which to compare communities served by LRSD French Immersion and English Language schools. Nevertheless, these choices were made for illustrative purposes, and the conclusions drawn from these examples cannot be generalized to other schools or the Division as a whole.

Unemployed Diploma Not

English

Island Lakes Community School

12.0% 2.3% 0.0% 15.9% 5.3% 10.6%

J H Bruns Collegiate 15.2% 3.3% 1.6% 16.1% 7.3% 10.0% Lavalle School 47.5% 6.9% 28.4% 29.8% 19.1% 12.7% Louis Riel Arts & Technology Centre

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

Marion School 37.8% 3.6% 23.2% 23.8% 15.8% 26.6% Minetonka School 26.8% 5.9% 3.8% 17.1% 9.2% 8.1% Nelson McIntyre Collegiate 34.6% 4.4% 17.8% 22.3% 13.4% 18.4% Niakwa Place School 18.7% 3.3% 2.5% 16.2% 8.2% 10.3% Nordale School 27.9% 3.9% 14.7% 19.9% 10.3% 13.0% Samuel Burland School 14.8% 3.3% 0.0% 12.7% 6.3% 11.4% Shamrock School 15.1% 4.1% 1.8% 16.2% 7.9% 9.4% St. George School 41.6% 4.7% 27.2% 26.3% 16.2% 13.0% Victor Mager School 30.6% 5.5% 26.8% 27.9% 19.7% 22.9% Victor Wyatt School 37.4% 4.3% 17.5% 17.4% 8.4% 10.6% Windsor School 32.8% 2.2% 4.5% 20.0% 8.9% 3.8% Windsor Park Collegiate 33.4% 2.1% 9.4% 21.3% 10.4% 11.3% FI Schools Average 25.7% 3.8% 9.5% 18.7% 10.5% 12.3%

English School Average 27.5% 3.9% 9.9% 19.6% 10.9% 11.8%

*These data describe the socio-economic characteristics of the community that make up the catchment area of each LRSD schools, and does not reference the socio-economic characteristics of the students enrolled in each of these schools.

60

Final Report


Saint Boniface Elementary Schools

This example demonstrates that the communities served by elementary French Immersion and English Language schools in the Saint Boniface neighbourhood have similar socio-economic characteristics (Table 15a).

Table 15a


Community Single

Parents

Labour Force

Unemployed

Income

<$30,000

No High

School

Diploma

Transiency

Home

Language

Not

English

École Provencher 34.3% 4.4% 17.7% 22.1% 13.5% 18.6% École Henri-Bergeron 34.3% 4.4% 17.7% 22.1% 13.5% 18.6% Average of these 2 communities 34.4% 4.4% 17.7% 22.1% 13.5% 18.6%

Archwood School 37.7% 7.1% 10.6% 22.2% 13.4% 10.8% Marion School 37.8% 3.6% 23.2% 23.8% 15.8% 26.6% Nordale School 27.9% 3.9% 14.7% 19.9% 10.3% 13.0% Average of these 3 communities 34.5% 4.9% 16.1% 22.0% 13.2% 16.8%


There are slight differences between the communities served by elementary French Immersion and English Language schools in Saint Boniface when it comes to low income and English is not the home language. The school communities of École Henri-Bergeron and École Provencher have a slightly higher percentage of their population which is low income whose language in the home is not English. Windsor Park Senior Years Schools

Again, this example demonstrates that the communities served by senior years French Immersion and English Language schools in the Windsor Park neighbourhood have similar socio-economic characteristics (Table 15b).

Table 15b



Parents

Labour Force

Unemployed

Income

<$30,000

No High

School

Diploma

Transiency

Home

Language

Not

English

Collège Béliveau 24.7% 3.4% 9.8% 19.3% 10.1% 13.1%

Windsor Park Collegiate 33.4% 2.1% 9.4% 21.3% 10.4% 11.3% J H Bruns Collegiate 15.2% 3.3% 1.6% 16.1% 7.3% 10.0% Nelson McIntyre Collegiate 34.6% 4.4% 17.8% 22.3% 13.4% 18.4% Average of these 3 communities 27.7% 3.3% 6.9% 19.9% 10.4% 13.2%


61

Final Report


There are slight differences between the communities served by senior years French Immersion and English Language schools in Windsor Park when it comes to single parents and low income. The school community of Collège Béliveau has a lower percentage of their population which are single parent families, while this community has a higher percentage of their population which is low income, when compared with the average of communities that are served by Windsor Park, J.H. Bruns, and Nelson McIntyre Collegiate. 2. Conclusions

Whether examining LRSD as a whole or shining a spotlight on specific school communities, the differences in socio-economic characteristics between the communities served by French Immersion and English Language schools are slight. It is important to understand that these data refer to communities that make up the catchment of each of LRSD schools, and does not reference the socio-economic characteristics of the students enrolled in each of these schools. However, this information suggests that the communities served by French Immersion schools in Louis Riel School Division are not more socially advantaged or disadvantaged than those served by English language schools.

62

Final Report


-- Conclusions -- The reach of the Review suggests a high level of confidence in the findings, as web survey response rates were high (78% for staff, 82% for students, and 60% for parents/families) and findings were corroborated by interviews and focus groups. Generally, there are findings that suggest data collected within Louis Riel School Division aligns with what exists in the literature, while in other places it does not.

A. Reasons for Enrolment The literature outlined that families most frequently placed their child(ren) in French Immersion because they believed it would provide greater future job opportunities. Almost three-quarters of parent/families (72%) in LRSD believed that enrolling their child(ren) in French Immersion would increase their future job opportunities. Furthermore, LRSD FI parents most frequently chose FI because their wanted their child(ren) to effectively communicate in French and English when they graduated (75%). Staff completing the survey believed it is “very important” (71%) or “important” (27%) that French Immersion increases students’ future job opportunities. Students (81%) and parents (83%) also believed that French Immersion will help to get a job later in life. LRSD students who were interviewed or attended the focus group also felt their families chose

FI because it would provide more future opportunities. Therefore, LRSD Review findings support the research literature, namely that families believe that placing their children in French Immersion will improve their future possibilities, particularly their employment options. Staff in LRSD echoed this belief, at times citing examples from their own life experiences during focus groups.

B. Who is Enrolled in French Immersion

1. Homes with Another French-Speaking Person The literature suggested that children from French/English bilingual households were more likely to be enrolled in French Immersion than were students from English-only homes. Data from LRSD highlights that, while families spoke mostly English at home, over three quarters of students (77%) reported that someone else in their home/family spoke French, 81% of whom indicated their sister/brother, mother (40%), father (30%), or grandparent (33%) spoke French.

J’ai deux soeurs dans cette école. On peut avoir des conversations en français sans que les parents comprennent ! I have two sisters in this school. We can have conversations in French without our parents understanding us! (Student)

Mes parents voulaient que j’apprends le français parce qu’ils n’ont pas eu ce privilège. My parents wanted me to learn French because they did not have this privilege. (Student)

63

Final Report


2. Socio-economic Background While on a national level the literature suggests students in French Immersion tend to come from higher socio-economic backgrounds, this was not characteristic of all provinces. Provincial data on the socio-economic background of French Immersion students is not available. The only data available to inform the socio-economic background of French Immersion students is the community profile data which Louis Riel School Division receives from Baragar Systems. However, it is critical to understand that these data refer to the communities that make up the catchment of each of LRSD schools, and does not reference the socio-economic characteristics of the students enrolled in each of these schools. Whether examining LRSD as a whole or shining a spotlight on specific school communities, the differences in socio-economic characteristics between the communities served by French Immersion and English Language schools are slight. On average, communities served by French Immersion schools have a slightly lower percentage of the population that are single parent families, labour force unemployed, low income, have no high school diploma, and are transient. However, the catchment communities of English Language schools have a slightly lower percentage of their community population whose home language is not English. This information suggests that the communities served by French Immersion schools in Louis Riel School Division are not more socially advantaged or disadvantaged than those served by English language schools. It is suggested LRSD collect more accurate information regarding the socio-economic backgrounds of those enrolled in their schools.

3. Educational Attainment Research findings supported that French Immersion participation was not correlated to parental educational achievement. While parents were not asked about their educational attainment on the web survey, community profile data suggests that the percentage of community members served by French Immersion schools who do not have a high school diploma (18.7%) was similar to that of English Language schools (19.6%).

As I only have experience with one French Immersion school, these statements can hardly be generalized to the larger population that is the French immersion community…I feel that the French Immersion schools of Winnipeg are geared towards a demographic of financially, very well off families. I feel that low-income families are at an extreme disadvantage, the extracurricular activities offered are not a tangible goal for low-income families, i.e Mad Science... At [our] school, school fees are $110 per year, per child… As a parent on E.I.A as well as being a full time university student the $110 fee is more than 1/3 of our monthly income. E.I.A does not cover this, school fees come out of our basic needs budget. This type of cost can be devastating for a family, (this is why it is the middle of November and mine are not paid), even more so for families with multiple children. The school supply list I received in September called for all brand name products, the most expensive of everything a 6 year old can use in a classroom. What is the reasoning for this? In short, to one unbeknownst to the intentions of the French Immersion community, one might believe it is a socioeconomically elite group/community, that use policies and fees to weed out the "undesirables." And this is why I would not recommend a French Immersion to my friends. My friends are poor. (Parent)

64

Final Report


4. Gender Although dated, the literature suggests more females than males were enrolled in French Immersion at a national level. This was supported by 2014/2015 LRSD enrolment data, where 46% of French Immersion students were male as compared with 54% of female students. Nevertheless, the opposite was true for LRSD English Language schools, where 47% of students were female and 53% were male. This stands in contrast to web survey findings, where 69% of parents did not believe that FI is better suited to female students (24% did not know). School staff held similar beliefs in that 83% did not believe French Immersion was better suited to female students (11% indicated they did not know). This might suggest the need to determine if French Immersion pedagogy in LRSD is as supportive of male as it is of female learners. While data provided by the province indicates a slight fluctuation in the percentage of females and males in French Immersion in LRSD by grade, these data are only available for the year 2013/2014, therefore only providing ‘a snapshot’ of enrolment by gender. Unfortunately, these data cannot provide information as to whether male or female students attrition out of French Immersion at the same or different rates, and whether there are certain points in students’ careers in which more males leave the French Immersion program than females. This suggests possible areas of further inquiry for LRSD. An analysis of enrolment by gender over a 10 year period would provide LRSD with information as to whether this Review’s findings regarding enrolment by gender are similar to what has been the case in the past. Collecting further information over time will also allow for analysis regarding attrition by gender. In addition, consideration should be given to collecting more information about students who leave French Immersion, including gender and possible exit interviews, in order to determine if male and female students leave French Immersion for different reasons. This may also inform whether French Immersion pedagogy in LRSD is as supportive of male as it is of female learners.

5. Increasing Enrolment Enrolment in FI is rising nationally, provincially, and within LRSD. The literature that addresses reasons for this rise was noticeably absent, however information from staff focus groups and the popular press suggested this increase could be attributed to French Immersion graduates choosing this option for their children. In Louis Riel School Division, 23% of parents completing the web survey had attended a French Immersion school. They were most likely to do so when at the elementary and/or middle/junior high levels. Unfortunately, these data are not

In LRSD French Immersion 54% of the population is female and 46% is male, while in English Language schools it is 47% female and 53% male.

Immersion graduates are putting their children in immersion. That speaks a lot to the program. It is expanding because of the experience of people now putting their children in the program…We have students in this school now whose parents went to this school. (Staff)

65

Final Report


available for past LRSD populations, so it is not possible to determine if the percentage of parents who attended French Immersion themselves and who have children currently enrolled in FI has increased. It is suggested LRSD track this information over time to possibly ascertain if parental attendance in French Immersion helps explain increasing enrolment. Furthermore, LRSD should investigate if data regarding whether parents of French Immersion students attended FI is available for other urban school divisions and/or the province as a whole. In addition, the literature suggests that homes in which French is spoken, notably French/English bilingual homes, were more likely to enroll their children in French Immersion. While very few students reported speaking French in their home, three quarters of students who responded to the survey (77%) reported that someone else in their home/family spoke French, 81% of whom indicated their sister/brother, mother (40%), father (30%), or grandparent (33%) spoke French. Again, it is suggested LRSD track this information over time to possibly ascertain if having another family member who speaks French helps explain increasing enrolment, as well as investigate whether these data are available for other urban school divisions and/or the province as a whole. Information from open-ended comments of the staff and parent survey, as well as interviews and focus groups, suggests that being of French-speaking heritage may influence families’ choice to place their child(ren) in French Immersion, irrespective of whether the family includes French-speakers. LRSD serves communities that have traditionally included families of French-speaking heritage. If LRSD has current and historical data regarding students’ heritage, this could be examined to determine if heritage and/or a desire for language reclamation helps explain why French Immersion enrolment in LRSD is higher than the province as a whole.

C. French Immersion and Newcomer or Allophone Students The literature indicates that newcomer or Allophone students have been discouraged from enrolling in French Immersion despite evidence that they perform as well as their English-speaking counterparts. Community profile population-based data provided to LRSD from Baragar Systems indicates that the communities served by French Immersion and English Language schools have approximately the same percentage of the community population whose home language is not English, although the average percent is slightly higher for French Immersion schools.

During focus groups, early years staff indicated there were more newcomer students in French Immersion classrooms. However, French Immersion schools (2.2%) in LRSD have a lower percentage of students who receive funding as English as an Additional Language learners than do English Language program schools (11.2%). However, it is important to keep in mind that these indicators only include

If you go down the street to [an English school in LRSD] -- I talked to a guy who teaches English there and he said they added it up and there are kids are coming to the school with 47 different languages. (Staff)

66

Final Report


students who are funded as EAL learners. Therefore, while the percentage of the population that speak a home language other than English in the communities served by LRSD French Immersion schools and English Language schools is approximately the same, French Immersion schools include a lower percentage of their school’s population that are funded EAL learners. During staff focus groups there was some acknowledgement that immigration into Manitoba may be change this. Therefore, these lines of evidence suggest LRSD might want to investigate why there are fewer EAL funded students in French Immersion. In addition, LRSD should consider investigating if the populations of those enrolled in their schools are becoming more diverse by tracking students’ heritage and other languages spoken in students’ homes.

D. French Immersion Model and Achievement

The literature has established that age of entry into the program, degree of language instruction, total cumulative time spent in the target language and the pedagogical approach to language learning have been the variables that support students proficiency in language acquisition. The evidence indicates that

LRSD’s model of French Immersion, with a focus on milieu settings and not starting English language instruction until Grade 2, provides for optimal language proficiency. Discussion with staff and students affirmed the milieu model. Generally, students expressed confidence in their French skills. Over three quarters of students who responded to the web survey believed they could speak (79%) and read (77%) French well, while fewer felt they wrote well in French (69%). Parents also felt the same. However, students’ use of French in school and on the school grounds deceases by grade level. Nevertheless, discussion during staff focus groups revealed ways in which staff felt French language instruction in LRSD could be improved. One teacher, who was also a graduate of French Immersion, explained:

We have seen that we have the quantity, with upwards of 30% of kids in immersion. I think our next step is quality. It is one thing to graduate as an immersion student, but if you are not a bilingual citizen afterwards, what does that mean? Sure the lessons of French Immersion are beyond language acquisition, but there needs to be an opportunity to ensure that there is a proficiency in French to be able to continue with your life in both languages. I think this is the next challenge. Do those who graduate have a mastery of the French language? I don’t think this is something that should be neglected.

In addition, research indicated that studying in French did not affect students’ English language development. Student achievement data was not collected as part of the Review. A comment from one parent indicated they believed their children’s English language skills were not as proficient as those who attended English Language schools.

I am very happy that LRSD is focused on keeping milieu programs versus dual track. (Parent)

67

Final Report


E. French Immersion in the Inclusive Classroom The literature suggests that French Immersion is a program appropriate for a wide range of learners, including students with language impairments and struggling readers. The work of Fred Genesee and others argue that students with academic challenges can benefit from FSL learning and that this does not put them further at risk. Staff in focus groups and those who responded to the web survey believed French Immersion was suitable for students with special learning needs (76%). However, staff were split in their opinions regarding the suitability of French Immersion for students having literacy challenges in their first language (53% believe it is suitable, while 38% do not). There was a similar split in staff perceptions regarding supports available for students with special learning needs and the teachers who work with them. However, school enrolment profile data tells a different story. In LRSD English Language schools, 5.7% of the population was considered ‘special education,’ meaning these students receive Level II or Level III funding. This is compared with an average of 0.8% for LRSD French Immersion schools. Therefore, there were fewer Level II and Level III funded students in French Immersion than in English Language schools. As a result, LRSD might want to investigate why there are fewer Level II and III funded students in French Immersion. As well, staff’s attitudes toward the suitability of French Immersion for all learners and their perceptions of the supports available to these students warrants further discussion.

F. Attrition from French Immersion Most students transition into FI in Grade 1, while LRSD’s Middle Immersion program creates another point at which there is a net gain of students into the program. This is not true elsewhere in Winnipeg or the province. In LRSD, as well as elsewhere, lose students in French Immersion out of French Immersion at every subsequent grade level after Grade 1, with the previously noted exception of gaining students in Grade 4 in LRSD. The transition into Grade 7 is the time in which LRSD loses the most students out of French Immersion, and the percentage of students who transition out of FI at this point is higher in LRSD than in other urban school divisions or the province. However, it is important to keep in mind that other school divisions have late entry French Immersion in Grade 7. While the percentage of students transitioning into these programs at this point is not provided, this is likely a factor for the relatively low level of attrition out of FI at Grade 7. In other urban school divisions and the province as a whole the highest percentage attrition out of French Immersion occurs in Grades 9, 10, and 11. This is not the case in LRSD.

My son has been seeing a speech therapist for a few years...we feared that the French Immersion may be too much for him considering he is still kind of learning English language due to his speech impediment. It has had the opposite effect as his French is much more understandable than his English. (Parent)

68

Final Report


Therefore, the attrition pattern of students in and out of French Immersion in LRSD is different than other urban school divisions and the province, explained partly by the different access points for late French Immersion programs. Like all educational programming, there has been attrition in French Immersion, most commonly as students enter middle or high school. The literature suggests a number of possible reasons for this, including parents/families’ lack of confidence in their ability to support their child’s learning in French. Students echoed this perception in interviews and in the focus group, while parents also made comments on the web survey. In addition, it was also suggested that students who experience academic difficulties were being ‘counselled out’ of French Immersion, spurred on by the erroneous assumption that struggling students would be more successful in an English language program. As previously stated, consideration should be given to collecting more information about students who leave French Immersion, including tracking data and possible exit interviews. This would provide LRSD with more robust information about why students leave French Immersion and could inform French Immersion practice in LRSD by highlighting what can be done in order to address why students leave French Immersion.

G. French Immersion Students and Post-Secondary Education The literature suggests approximately half of FI students attending university take course(s) in French. What was not clear in the literature was how many of French Immersion graduates attend post-secondary in French, rather than taking French language courses in English institutions. This uncertainty was also found in LRSD. Students completing the survey were not so sure of their future post-secondary plans. While 27% had plans to go to a French college/university, 42% were unsure. In addition, 39% believed they would take courses in French at an English college/university. This appears to indicate students are unsure of their post-secondary plans and of the place of French language learning or study in them.