Equity report recommendations on GBRS

[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.

A kid can do well on cogats or have really creative work samples and be a terrible student.

[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.

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.

No they don't. Unless you count kids teaching themselves math using a computer program getting the most out of school. Or working with the Teacher a few times a month getting the most out if school.

You don't like tracking because it points out the obvious, that some parents don't care about school or don't understand what they need to do to prepare kids for school. Kids who start behind, keep falling behind. Kids with parents who are invested in education do well, kids whose parents are not invested in school do poorly. No amount of changing classroom structure is going to fix that. Stop trying to screw over the kids whose parents are invested n their kids education to make the kids whose parents don't give a crap feel better.

[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.

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.

No they don't. Unless you count kids teaching themselves math using a computer program getting the most out of school. Or working with the Teacher a few times a month getting the most out if school.

You don't like tracking because it points out the obvious, that some parents don't care about school or don't understand what they need to do to prepare kids for school. Kids who start behind, keep falling behind. Kids with parents who are invested in education do well, kids whose parents are not invested in school do poorly. No amount of changing classroom structure is going to fix that. Stop trying to screw over the kids whose parents are invested n their kids education to make the kids whose parents don't give a crap feel better.

Agree with all you have said. However it's not about making the kids whose parents don't give a crap feel better; it's about making those who advocate against tracking feel better. It's all about their virtue signalling.