Yes I can see that happening, since funding is directed at the immigrant students to address foundation language and numeracy skills, at a larger percentage in dollars, compared to the funding of SE students who are very much in need of reading, writing and numeracy remediation. Plus the programs to address language needs in English or French for immigrant students are much more effective, than the dumb-down remediation offered in the SE classes.

As far as I know - and please correct me if I am wrong - the funding directed at immigrant students is for ESL only, no numeracy.
A year or two of extra few hours a week of English, generally done with the same constructivist approach - mainly conversation and vocabulary is not the source of these results.

This is the result of the parent’s high standard mindset and their work to one way or another help their children achieve it.

I’m sure the list of Ontario scholars would yield similar results.

In the first place ESL students are funded through SE dollars. And the second point, is that ESL students received better instruction in writing, than their counterparts, the students whose first language is English. Two years ago, I wanted the on-line course of Basic English from Alberta, for grade 9 ESL students. I was quite willing to pay the course fee, for my child to provide her with a firmer foundation in grammar, essay writing, sentence structure and other mechanics in writing but I wanted one credit to be added to her requirements to received a diploma. The school had no problems with it, but the board turned me down once again. Instead, they offer the province’s basic course meant for the special education students, and is very much a dumb down version of regular English. It does not offer the comprehensive coverage of grammar and other writing mechanics essential for good writing.  The school was against it, as I was too, and it was decided to continued with the tutoring at home in writing, along with increase support from all teachers to address and improve her writing.

It is crazy, that ESL students received better support in language, than the LD students who have been identified with reading and writing problems. ESL students received more help in numeracy than their counterparts, but this observation is only based on a very small sample within my local community. At the present time, there is no ESL students, but that could change at anytime.

The courses and on-line support for ESL students are much better because they offer the grammar and other writing mechanics that are essential for good writing. It was the first place I went to to print off lessons and work sheets that I thought would help my child.

Really? Are ESL English materials better than mainstream ones? That would be funny.

What I said about the ESL language courses was what I heard from parents from my community. While they were happy there was support for their children to catch up with English they were dissapointed that the materials seemed unstructured, the ESL courses were emphasizing oral communication and there was very little grammar compared with their expectations for a language course.

That was exactly my experience with the one ESL course I attended in Toronto. Even though it was supposedly aimed at immigrants having a high intermediate or advanced level English language proficiency there was no emphasis whatsoever on correct pronounciation, correct sentence structure, grammar.
The course was good in giving one the confidence to talk in any situation because that’s all we did: talk; it was good in making one aware of typical Canadian everyday language: greetings, asking questions, making or accepting invitations.
No corrections of prononciation or sentence structure were ever provided.
Now, I get the politeness and I get that people try to encourage you and to bring up your self esteem.
However that was an English language course for students at a high intermediate or advanced level. You attend such a course to get feedback on how to speak proper English not to fossilize through repetition your current not quite right pronounciation.

True for Ontario, but in NL and other provinces ESL students are receiving grammar, other writing mechanics/conventions, and as well as oral communication skills. Although NL’s immigrant population is small compared to the bigger provinces, ESL students learn to speak and write English very well, with a Newfoundland accent.

“The 1970s saw a shift in emphasis from the teaching of language as a closed set of forms to the teaching of language as an open ended series of communicative functions. In the classroom,
this led to a shift in emphasis from developing formal accuracy to developing functional fluency.
Today it is widely accepted that “ability to communicate is not obtained most quickly or efficiently through pure communication
practice in the classroom - not, at least, within the framework of a formal course” (Larsen-Freeman 1995). Findings of immersion studies suggest that when language learning is purely communicative, some linguistic features do not ultimately develop
to target levels. (Lightbown & White 1987).
It is therefore no longer a question of whether to teach grammar in the classroom. It is a question of how. If the concept of grammar teaching is revised and it occupies its central place in the language
curriculum, it becomes not discrepant but in harmony with educational and personal aspirations.”

http://www.ed.gov.nl.ca/edu/k12/curriculum/guides/esl/esl1205/prog_des.pdf

http://www.ed.gov.nl.ca/edu/k12/curriculum/guides/esl/index.html