Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dual Language Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and teachers urge Liberty Hill ISD to keep two‑way dual language program
Summary
Multiple parents and district educators told the Liberty Hill ISD board they oppose a district plan to shift from a two‑way to a one‑way Spanish dual language model, urging a side‑by‑side cost analysis and greater community input before any change.
Several parents and district educators told the Liberty Hill Independent School District board at its public‑comment period that a planned shift from a two‑way Spanish dual language model to a one‑way model would harm students and enrollment.
"Let's keep the 2 way program alive," one parent said, urging trustees to preserve the district’s two‑way immersion program that she and other families said had been the deciding factor in their choice to enroll at Liberty Hill. Another speaker who identified herself as both a parent and an educator said the district recently announced plans to move to a one‑way model and asked the board to produce a side‑by‑side cost analysis before finalizing any change.
Speakers described academic and social benefits of the two‑way model: bilingualism, biliteracy, cultural connection, and daily peer interaction between English and Spanish speakers. An educator who has taught in the program said two‑way classrooms let emergent bilingual students learn English alongside native English speakers and that the model supports family engagement across cultures.
Parents also warned of unintended consequences if the district moves to a one‑way model. Several said enrollment could decline among families who moved into the district specifically for the two‑way program, and that emergent bilingual students could be isolated in larger ESL‑only classes. "Why would we wanna limit this opportunity?" one parent asked in the public comments.
Speakers repeatedly asked the board to gather broader community feedback and to involve the district’s dual language team in crafting any alternatives. Board members acknowledged the comments and noted staff had been asked to prepare information; speakers requested a formal, comparative cost and outcome analysis before the board takes further action.
Next steps: speakers requested the district present a detailed, side‑by‑side fiscal and programmatic analysis and to host more community input sessions before any change to the dual language model is finalized.
