Doing Dual Language in 205

This past Tuesday, the Board of Education voted on the implementation of Dual Language (DL) programming at Conrad Fischer. I have to admit that, when discussions about DL first got underway last year, I was intrigued. The benefits of DL are proven--when programming is carefully executed, and community members of various backgrounds have a meaningful role in planning and decision-making. Assuming that's the case, districts in nearby suburbs have demonstrated that DL can lessen achievement gaps and cultural divides, while simultaneously enriching linguistic fluency and comprehension.

Who wouldn't welcome such advantages--and the many other exceptional things that DL both can and should be--in their community? Yet, like all-things excellent in District 205, an outstanding DL program won't happen by simply willing it to be so. Nor will it materialize by failing to address the longstanding concerns of community members who have been asking questions, doing research, and advocating for months. Concerns about a variety of topics, ranging from issues surrounding space to the bigger picture of having a voice in establishing and executing DL immersion.

Since summer, I've tried to learn more about DL. Primarily because two of my six children have yet to enter kindergarten. I didn't expect every detail I gleaned to be precise, but nor was I anticipating quite the investigatory process that awaited me. Initially, I heard Mandarin might be part of the curriculum (per a Board doc from this past summer); now that no longer seems to be the case. As of the 2016/2017 school year, several parents I spoke to seemed to be under the impression that a site had not been determined for DL programming; per 205's DL website, however, Fischer was the chosen location as of early this fall. When I took the DL survey, no mention was made about the possibility of busing Fischer kindergartners who opted out of DL to Emerson. (To be clear, if there had been, I probably would have thought longer and harder about how I answered questions regarding programming, since neighborhood schools are a priority to me.) Nonetheless, parents began unofficially hearing in October that relocation was a distinct possibility, though supposedly it no longer is.

And, of course, there are concerns about space. Some parents at Fischer have asserted space is too limited for DL to be feasible at their school. At the December Board meeting, the administration appeared quick to dispel these notions. Then on Tuesday, January 9, 2018--less than a month later--they conceded that space could be a potential challenge. One proposed solution was to re-purpose resource areas and reallocate staff. While that sounds innovative, it always helps to expect the unexpected. Should this solution fail, what then? Will we ever so subtly increase class sizes, which (as we have reinforced MULTIPLE times, including via a 2006 referendum) is not in any way acceptable to us as a community? This is a point worth considering now, especially as increased class sizes in non-immersed rooms can be problematic following DL roll-outs. (See http://kutv.com/news/local/utahs-dual-immersion-programs-working-but-at-expensive-of-other-students.)

For me, however, these are details that could have--and ideally still can be--discussed and addressed. What is harder to work beyond is the notion that several parents I deeply respect feel they have not been heard. Or worse still, that what they're saying is negligible. For me, meeting some of these men and women has been THE high point of learning about what has been proposed for DL here. Contrary to what was inferred on Tuesday, they are not struggling to adjust to change. Like other parents from other schools who are responding similarly, they simply want it to prove as beneficial as possible--for as many kids as possible.

I recognize in all sincerity that serving in an administrative capacity and/or on the Board must sometimes feel like a thankless job. We have been reminded that not everyone can be pleased with every decision, etc. I say with total confidence that no one expects complete unison. At the same time, we have a difficult job, as well; the feeling that we need to advocate this frequently--when we're all members of the same community--is more than slightly mind-boggling.

Hopefully, the concerns that community members have noted about DL for months now will prove moot points or will be resolved. Hopefully, in the months ahead, community members will regain the voice they deserve and don't see fit to have silenced--as parents, educators, and/or taxpayers. Either way, as is noted below by the third speaker during Public Comment (see below), we'll be here. In terms of discussions about DL, changes to middle school, the right of educators to express their ideas at Board meetings, the upcoming referendum, and a variety of other topics.

*Speech by Robin Petchul during Public Comment (Dual Language Implementation at Conrad Fischer)

*Speech by Tanya Cummins during Public Comment (Reciprocity of Respect Between the Board and the Community)

*Speech by Tamica Stechschulte during Public Comment (DL Implementation at Fischer)

*Superintendent's Agenda: Dr. Moyer/Dr. Mary Henderson/Jane Bailey (Approval of Dual Language Program)

*Link to Supporting Board Documentation Related to Approval of Dual Language