Equity report recommendations on GBRS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are always going to be parents who are looking to place their kids in tougher courses then they belong in but the majority of parents get it right or listen to Teacher feedback. We are in an LI program and have watched as the class has shrunk. we know a good number of the kids left for the Gen Ed program because something about the LI program was not working for them. The class has shrunk by 1/3 and only a handful have been due to moves or leaving for the Center.

I get that there are the cluesless parents who think a kid with a 30% on the iReady might belong in Advanced Math but I would suggest that that parent is an outlier. I would also guess that the parents who are focused on AAP as a status thing would be more likely to place their kid in LLIV. If the program becomes less about status and more about a regular placement, the status issue diminishes and more parents will make better, informed choices.

And yes, I could be naive, but it seems to work at our school with LI. I suspect that it works because people don't see it as being a big deal to be in LI vs Gen Ed. I occasionally hear some parents say that Gen Ed is seen as lesser but they are focused on the fact that there are Cultural events based on the language at the school that they think single out the Gen Ed kids. The events are open to everyone and are held in English but there are language components and cultural components that are taught as part of the LI program.

No. Parents overestimate and underestimate their kids. That's why the admissions process exists, because parents are the wrong judge of their child's academic capabilities.

Agree that parents can’t possibly be objective about their own kids. On the other hand, the GBRS is so subjective that it isn’t much better. Some teachers are looking for a child to demonstrate all the behaviors listed, every single day, without exception. Others are more generous. Some kids are too quiet, or too loud. So many variables. Kids score 145 on CoGat but are rejected because their teacher doesn’t like them for some reason, which seems wild to me.

[Anonymous]

They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are always going to be parents who are looking to place their kids in tougher courses then they belong in but the majority of parents get it right or listen to Teacher feedback. We are in an LI program and have watched as the class has shrunk. we know a good number of the kids left for the Gen Ed program because something about the LI program was not working for them. The class has shrunk by 1/3 and only a handful have been due to moves or leaving for the Center.

I get that there are the cluesless parents who think a kid with a 30% on the iReady might belong in Advanced Math but I would suggest that that parent is an outlier. I would also guess that the parents who are focused on AAP as a status thing would be more likely to place their kid in LLIV. If the program becomes less about status and more about a regular placement, the status issue diminishes and more parents will make better, informed choices.

And yes, I could be naive, but it seems to work at our school with LI. I suspect that it works because people don't see it as being a big deal to be in LI vs Gen Ed. I occasionally hear some parents say that Gen Ed is seen as lesser but they are focused on the fact that there are Cultural events based on the language at the school that they think single out the Gen Ed kids. The events are open to everyone and are held in English but there are language components and cultural components that are taught as part of the LI program.

No. Parents overestimate and underestimate their kids. That's why the admissions process exists, because parents are the wrong judge of their child's academic capabilities.

This. As a teacher, I absolutely agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

I like your thinking but disagree on the Pass Advanced. Some kids are just terrible test takers. Some kids just have an off day. Some AAP kids get in their heads and over analyze and don’t do as well. I would say a solid pass of 450 or higher is fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

I like your thinking but disagree on the Pass Advanced. Some kids are just terrible test takers. Some kids just have an off day. Some AAP kids get in their heads and over analyze and don’t do as well. I would say a solid pass of 450 or higher is fair.

Yeah, but they'd only get removed if the teacher also agrees that they should be removed. One of the biggest flaws with AAP is that even if all of the SOLs/iready tests and all of the teachers agree that the kid is not advanced and does not belong in an advanced classroom, there's no way to remove the kid from AAP. Teachers can be biased, so I'd hate to use their opinion alone. Some kids can be bad test takers or overthink things. But if both of these indicate a need for gen ed, then the kid should be placed in gen ed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

+1. This is how it should be done, and #2 and #3 should be required for Honors classes at the secondary level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TBH, the equity people came across as a bit clueless. And contradictory.

A lot of the recommendations have been or are in the process of being implemented. Local norms, more LLV programs; WISC seems to matter less; NNAT has been deemed nearly moot at this point. But GBRS recommendation appears to have fallen on deaf ears. It strikes me as odd that such an objectively flawed metric would count for so much.

Because they are looking for a way to see what kids in the class seem to want to be learning and who are curious and engaged.

Honestly, I think the language immersion programs work because parents who are interested in their kids education tend to put their kids in the programs. I know parents who know that LI wouldn’t work for their kid in K or 1 because of where the kids was in their learning or ability to focus who choose not to put their kid in LI. But that is why the program works, parents who know their kid and think their kid can handle the challenge put their kid in LI. Teachers can counsel parents to remove a kid because they are struggling with math or science, since that is taught in the new language, or in the language. Most parents listen to the Teachers on that.

LIV could probably work in the same way. Just make it local and let parents choose to put their kid in or not. Teach to the curriculum as written and kids who are struggling can be moved to the other class with parents consent.

Parents tend to have a good grasp of their kids abilities and most want their kid to succeed. If you send home progress reports and report cards with lots of 1s and 2s then most parents will be up to moving their kid. If a kid is getting solid 4s in Gen Ed and the Teacher thinks they can handle LIV, have a chat with the parents.

Remove the application process and make it seem less special and some of the craziness goes away. And we can save money on the NNAT, CogAT, and time spent building and reviewing packets.

This is a naive statement. And wrong.

Agree. I had a parent ask about Adv math and their kid got 30 percent on IReady. I have had kids prepping for IAAT who I already know won’t get into algebra based off how they are doing. Many parents are in denial about how their kid is performing in school.

There are several kids in my child’s LLIV class that get math pull outs because they can’t handle advanced math so honestly I’m not surprised by this at all. Ii,shine they are the principal placed kids, but what a waste of resources - I’m sure there are enough kids struggling with on grade level math that need help. Why are we providing pull outs for kids who can’t handle ADVANCED math?? Just drop them down to normal math where they clearly belong.

[Anonymous]

Supposed to say “I imagine” not I shine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:TBH, the equity people came across as a bit clueless. And contradictory.

A lot of the recommendations have been or are in the process of being implemented. Local norms, more LLV programs; WISC seems to matter less; NNAT has been deemed nearly moot at this point. But GBRS recommendation appears to have fallen on deaf ears. It strikes me as odd that such an objectively flawed metric would count for so much.

Because they are looking for a way to see what kids in the class seem to want to be learning and who are curious and engaged.

Honestly, I think the language immersion programs work because parents who are interested in their kids education tend to put their kids in the programs. I know parents who know that LI wouldn’t work for their kid in K or 1 because of where the kids was in their learning or ability to focus who choose not to put their kid in LI. But that is why the program works, parents who know their kid and think their kid can handle the challenge put their kid in LI. Teachers can counsel parents to remove a kid because they are struggling with math or science, since that is taught in the new language, or in the language. Most parents listen to the Teachers on that.

LIV could probably work in the same way. Just make it local and let parents choose to put their kid in or not. Teach to the curriculum as written and kids who are struggling can be moved to the other class with parents consent.

Parents tend to have a good grasp of their kids abilities and most want their kid to succeed. If you send home progress reports and report cards with lots of 1s and 2s then most parents will be up to moving their kid. If a kid is getting solid 4s in Gen Ed and the Teacher thinks they can handle LIV, have a chat with the parents.

Remove the application process and make it seem less special and some of the craziness goes away. And we can save money on the NNAT, CogAT, and time spent building and reviewing packets.

This is a naive statement. And wrong.

Agree. I had a parent ask about Adv math and their kid got 30 percent on IReady. I have had kids prepping for IAAT who I already know won’t get into algebra based off how they are doing. Many parents are in denial about how their kid is performing in school.

There are several kids in my child’s LLIV class that get math pull outs because they can’t handle advanced math so honestly I’m not surprised by this at all. Ii,shine they are the principal placed kids, but what a waste of resources - I’m sure there are enough kids struggling with on grade level math that need help. Why are we providing pull outs for kids who can’t handle ADVANCED math?? Just drop them down to normal math where they clearly belong.

I have a friend whose child was selected for LIV. The kid is strong in LA and Social Studies but on grade level for math and has always found math to be more challenging. The parents choose to keep the child in Gen Ed because they knew that Advanced Math would be too much for their child. There are kids who are committee selected into LIV who are strong in LA and not math who struggle with the Advanced Math.

That is why they would be better served with Advanced Math and Advanced LA and flexible groupings that move kids to the Teacher/class that fits their needs. Kids strong in both areas would be in both Advanced groups, kids strong in one area would be challenged in the area that they need to be challenged. It would also mix up the classes a bit and help limit the smart vs Gen Ed rep that some parents complain about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

You are obviously not familiar with classrooms or how they work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

Yeah, that doesn't work. It is not good for the kids in the lowest group because they are struggling and they see the kids who have breezed through the material and are free reading or coloring or writing or being distracting because they are done and bored.

It is not good for the kids in the middle because they are not getting much attention from the Teacher. They are able to do most of the work with some help but they know that they are not flying through it.

It is not good for the kids at the top of the class because they finish everything easily and quickly. They complete the extra work, if any is assigned, and then they are on their own. They rarely work with the Teacher because they don't need help. They are unchallenged and bored.

It is not good for the Teacher because they have to develop lesson plans for upwards of 6 different groups of kids. All while knowing that at least 4 of those groups are not going to get the attention they deserve from them because they have to spend most of their time with the two groups that are below standards. And then they have to listen to the parents of the other 4 groups of kids complaining about not getting enough time with the Teacher and not getting enough work to challenge them.

At least AAP removes 2 of those groups from the classroom so that the Teacher is worrying about 4 groups of kids instead of 6.

Maybe you should focus your angst on coming up with ways to help parents of poor kids care enough about school and academics that the lower SES kids have a better chance of succeeding in school. Kids arriving at school not knowing their sounds or numbers or colors, or shapes starts the kids behind. That gets worse as many of the parents who are not reading or talking to their kids enough to expose them to sounds, letters, numbers, shapes, and colors are not going to suddenly start reading or doing things with their kids so that they stay on grade level in reading, math, science, or social studies and the kids fall farther behind.

Dropping programs that benefit kids whose parents are involved does nothing to help the kids whose parents are not involved. All it does is hamper a different group of kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

You are obviously not familiar with classrooms or how they work.

I've only taught LLIV AAP for the past 20 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

You are obviously not familiar with classrooms or how they work.

I've only taught LLIV AAP for the past 20 years.

Well there's your problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They really should simplify the process:
Split AAP into separate advanced math and advanced language arts programs.
1. Continue using CogAT. A score of 130+ gives one point.
2. Use some sort of achievement test. Testing above grade level is a point.
3. Ask teachers to check a box that is either recommending or not recommending for AAP. Having the box checked is a point.

Getting 2 or more points means the kid is in. Then, kids with the high test scores who are above grade level would get in, even if the teachers don't like them. Kids who are lacking in some area could still get boosted with the teacher recommendation.

For kids in the program, if they fail to get pass advanced on the SOL and then the teacher also checks the box that the kid does not belong in the advanced class, the kid is bumped back down. Likewise, gen ed kids who score pass advanced on the SOL and have the teacher recommendation get moved up.

Or we could just scrap this segregation program and start teaching all children at their level.

So much better for all kids to get rid of this nonsense and provide appropriate teaching. This bizarre segregation involves too much overhead, and half the kids there don't really belong. At least with a regular classroom, you can assign kids to the appropriate group so they get the most out of school.