Detracking and equity threatens all advanced academic programs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I previously posted how Algebra was being removed as an option for 6th graders in LCPS.

Looking at the state website explaining curriculum changes, there is a mention of detracking.
The idea is to not separate kids too much and saying that having kids of different ability level in the same class is beneficial to all.
There is also mention of equity in the curriculum.

It appears there is a push in Virginia DOE to remove higher level classes to reduce the achievement gap, particularly if there is a
racial disparity between who is taking the classes.

Fairfax has also adopted critical race theory and a push for equity, so AAP there is likely going to be reduced.

Has anyone seen detracking mentioned at meetings of a school board or other committees?

What is critical race theory?

When applied to education, it presumes that teachers are racist and schools are racist institutions, yet paradoxically, teachers and schools systems state that they anti-racist, and equity is stressed in ed schools.

Somebody is lying.

Not exactly. Critical Race Theory is a framework that presumes (our) society is built upon white supremacy, and as a result, institutions and systems benefit those who are white and (usually unintentionally) put racial minorities at a disadvantage, due to systemic inequities and structures that support the privileged and continue to perpetually disadvantage those who are not. Like...a self-powered perpetual motion machine that increasingly makes things better for rich white people and worse for poor black and brown people, and it won't stop unless people consciously work to change it.

If you don't understand that, ok. Hopefully you do now.
But if you have a problem with that....I'd say you are the problem.

We can work to fix these issues and still provide for different needs (enrich, supplement, enhance, modify, etc...). We just can't keep doing it the same way if we care about equity. But not everyone actually cares about equity I realize, so of course we'll see people complaining.

This was a good explanation.
But one thing it fails to spell out is that equity, in this instance, means equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity. And CRT measures equity primarily by who is at the finish line at the end of the race. Who is sitting at the board room table? Who is in the top 10% of that class.
And if the answer is not an equal distribution of winners, board members, scholars across race, then the *obvious* answer is that you must correct for that outcome. CRT does not allow for you to study the habits or behaviors or access to preparation/opportunities of those who were was winning the race, occupying board seats, or achieving and then figuring out how to replicate and promote those behaviors, practices, access among underespresented populations in order to achieve high results. To suggest that individuals can adjust these things to "even the playing field" to allow equality of OPPORTUNITY for individuals to achieve their desired result seems to be too much work. Instead, CRT suggests that you just fix the *obviously racist* glitch and award the medal, board position, scholarship to all races equally and this will fix everything.

I think a lot of people care about equity when it means fixing the system to give everyone a fair shot at achievement--which is something our system has clearly failed to do on many levels. But if equity means fixing the system by just rigging the results with no regard for addressing how we got to the disparity to begin with, then PP is right that I am not on board with that.

[Anonymous]

^^ I agree with the above except I would say that attitudes toward POC need to change.

Please tell me if honors, AP and IB programs in school today are inaccessible. Do kids of color feel not welcome in those classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ I agree with the above except I would say that attitudes toward POC need to change.

Please tell me if honors, AP and IB programs in school today are inaccessible. Do kids of color feel not welcome in those classes?

They are. You need to have the internal drive to want to do them or parents who are aware of them and are driving you to take those classes. You need to hit the necessary prereqs. The focus on ES is there because it builds the base for kids to be able to take honors and AP/IB classes.

I am not a big fan of tracking, mainly because I was supposed to be tracked into remedial classes because of learning disabilities and ADHD. The problem was that many of those remedial type classes were not challenging and the Teachers were not really focused on getting kids up to speed but to a point where they could attend votec classes when they got older. My parents wanted nothing to do with that and insisted that I be placed in Gen Ed classes. The SPED Teacher flat out told my parents I would never go to college so what was the point.

My parents won, I was in regular classes. I was a C/D student in math and science but an A student in English, history, and social studies. I was excluded from Honors classes in High School because of my LD's, that was another battle that my parents fought. We moved when I was entering my Junior year of HS and my new school gave me a series of placement exams. The Guidance Counselor there was shocked that I was not in honors classes. I ended up in AP English, I had already completed the counties social studies requirement so I did not get to take those classes. My parents did have to fight for me to receive Resource Support 3 times a week, essentially 1 on 1 help with math and science. I ended up a B student in Math and Science and an A student in everything else.

Tracking is dangerous, in my mind, because many parents are willing to accept that their kids will not do well in school and accept remedial classes. Kids will not be challenged and Teachers do not always feel motivated to help those kids get up to speed. I saw far too many creative, bright kids in remedial classes who had so much potential but who had never been told that. There are always exceptions, my parents and most of the parents posting in the Special Ed forum, but we are exceptions for a reason.

At the same time, I don't think that a Teacher in a classroom can handle the needs of remedial, gen ed, and advanced kids in one class. The advanced kids are left to work on their own, the gen ed kids get some extra attention, but the remedial kids get more of the attention.

The reality is that the only way to actually deal with the education gap is to find a way to change Parents attitude towards school and make school a priority for more families. But families with no history of schooling or massively disrupted schooling, many poor immigrants from South America, are not focused on school. They are worried about paying their bills and are not as likely to be keeping up with their kids school work. Parents who are dropouts are more likely to have kids who drop out. Mom and Dad didn't see school as important, why would they see it as important for their kids?

So we are trying to force schools to be able to connect with kids who have Parents who are not focused on school or invested in school and bring those kids to the same level as kids whose parents are invested in school. The Schools are able to reach some kids but not that many. Tracking is not going to be the answer because you are going to end up with socio economic/racially segregated classes. You can argue that classes are based on test scores or grades but the end resulted will be segregated classes and that is not going to be allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ I agree with the above except I would say that attitudes toward POC need to change.

Please tell me if honors, AP and IB programs in school today are inaccessible. Do kids of color feel not welcome in those classes?

They are. You need to have the internal drive to want to do them or parents who are aware of them and are driving you to take those classes. You need to hit the necessary prereqs. The focus on ES is there because it builds the base for kids to be able to take honors and AP/IB classes.

I am not a big fan of tracking, mainly because I was supposed to be tracked into remedial classes because of learning disabilities and ADHD. The problem was that many of those remedial type classes were not challenging and the Teachers were not really focused on getting kids up to speed but to a point where they could attend votec classes when they got older. My parents wanted nothing to do with that and insisted that I be placed in Gen Ed classes. The SPED Teacher flat out told my parents I would never go to college so what was the point.

My parents won, I was in regular classes. I was a C/D student in math and science but an A student in English, history, and social studies. I was excluded from Honors classes in High School because of my LD's, that was another battle that my parents fought. We moved when I was entering my Junior year of HS and my new school gave me a series of placement exams. The Guidance Counselor there was shocked that I was not in honors classes. I ended up in AP English, I had already completed the counties social studies requirement so I did not get to take those classes. My parents did have to fight for me to receive Resource Support 3 times a week, essentially 1 on 1 help with math and science. I ended up a B student in Math and Science and an A student in everything else.

Tracking is dangerous, in my mind, because many parents are willing to accept that their kids will not do well in school and accept remedial classes. Kids will not be challenged and Teachers do not always feel motivated to help those kids get up to speed. I saw far too many creative, bright kids in remedial classes who had so much potential but who had never been told that. There are always exceptions, my parents and most of the parents posting in the Special Ed forum, but we are exceptions for a reason.

At the same time, I don't think that a Teacher in a classroom can handle the needs of remedial, gen ed, and advanced kids in one class. The advanced kids are left to work on their own, the gen ed kids get some extra attention, but the remedial kids get more of the attention.

The reality is that the only way to actually deal with the education gap is to find a way to change Parents attitude towards school and make school a priority for more families. But families with no history of schooling or massively disrupted schooling, many poor immigrants from South America, are not focused on school. They are worried about paying their bills and are not as likely to be keeping up with their kids school work. Parents who are dropouts are more likely to have kids who drop out. Mom and Dad didn't see school as important, why would they see it as important for their kids?

So we are trying to force schools to be able to connect with kids who have Parents who are not focused on school or invested in school and bring those kids to the same level as kids whose parents are invested in school. The Schools are able to reach some kids but not that many. Tracking is not going to be the answer because you are going to end up with socio economic/racially segregated classes. You can argue that classes are based on test scores or grades but the end resulted will be segregated classes and that is not going to be allowed.

I generally support tracking, but your example hits on what I consider a major pitfall - the permanence of a decision to place a kid on a certain track. I think tracking is fine when there is expected and continual movement up and down based on performance the previous year in a given track.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ I agree with the above except I would say that attitudes toward POC need to change.

Please tell me if honors, AP and IB programs in school today are inaccessible. Do kids of color feel not welcome in those classes?

They are. You need to have the internal drive to want to do them or parents who are aware of them and are driving you to take those classes. You need to hit the necessary prereqs. The focus on ES is there because it builds the base for kids to be able to take honors and AP/IB classes.

I am not a big fan of tracking, mainly because I was supposed to be tracked into remedial classes because of learning disabilities and ADHD. The problem was that many of those remedial type classes were not challenging and the Teachers were not really focused on getting kids up to speed but to a point where they could attend votec classes when they got older. My parents wanted nothing to do with that and insisted that I be placed in Gen Ed classes. The SPED Teacher flat out told my parents I would never go to college so what was the point.

My parents won, I was in regular classes. I was a C/D student in math and science but an A student in English, history, and social studies. I was excluded from Honors classes in High School because of my LD's, that was another battle that my parents fought. We moved when I was entering my Junior year of HS and my new school gave me a series of placement exams. The Guidance Counselor there was shocked that I was not in honors classes. I ended up in AP English, I had already completed the counties social studies requirement so I did not get to take those classes. My parents did have to fight for me to receive Resource Support 3 times a week, essentially 1 on 1 help with math and science. I ended up a B student in Math and Science and an A student in everything else.

Tracking is dangerous, in my mind, because many parents are willing to accept that their kids will not do well in school and accept remedial classes. Kids will not be challenged and Teachers do not always feel motivated to help those kids get up to speed. I saw far too many creative, bright kids in remedial classes who had so much potential but who had never been told that. There are always exceptions, my parents and most of the parents posting in the Special Ed forum, but we are exceptions for a reason.

At the same time, I don't think that a Teacher in a classroom can handle the needs of remedial, gen ed, and advanced kids in one class. The advanced kids are left to work on their own, the gen ed kids get some extra attention, but the remedial kids get more of the attention.

The reality is that the only way to actually deal with the education gap is to find a way to change Parents attitude towards school and make school a priority for more families. But families with no history of schooling or massively disrupted schooling, many poor immigrants from South America, are not focused on school. They are worried about paying their bills and are not as likely to be keeping up with their kids school work. Parents who are dropouts are more likely to have kids who drop out. Mom and Dad didn't see school as important, why would they see it as important for their kids?

So we are trying to force schools to be able to connect with kids who have Parents who are not focused on school or invested in school and bring those kids to the same level as kids whose parents are invested in school. The Schools are able to reach some kids but not that many. Tracking is not going to be the answer because you are going to end up with socio economic/racially segregated classes. You can argue that classes are based on test scores or grades but the end resulted will be segregated classes and that is not going to be allowed.

I generally support tracking, but your example hits on what I consider a major pitfall - the permanence of a decision to place a kid on a certain track. I think tracking is fine when there is expected and continual movement up and down based on performance the previous year in a given track.

Permanence of placement was an issue when I was in school. I had a good friend who was an average student but loved history and probably would have done better in AP history classes than I (college/honors track) did. But they were never offered the chance to take honors or AP history only because of the prior tracking. That was in the 1990s, and our post-IDEA experience has been that, when we got to middle school, we were encouraged to pick the best option at each subject level for our kid rather than across-the-board all honors/all grade-level/all remedial.

Parents can also challenge school placement and supplement themselves, and, based on the PP's description, it sounds like they were in school prior to IDEA as well. The school has to accommodate my AAP kid with ADHD as well as my HFA/ADHD kid who is in general education classes with special ed supports. The schools absolutely try to do the bare minimum, but we're involved enough and know our rights to push for what they need. My special needs kid is fully capable of earning a high school diploma and not an applied studies degree - their disabilities are not intellectual (believe me, we've paid for private testing out of pocket several times). They are in honors classes for areas of strength and grade-level small-group for the ones with which they struggle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I generally support tracking, but your example hits on what I consider a major pitfall - the permanence of a decision to place a kid on a certain track. I think tracking is fine when there is expected and continual movement up and down based on performance the previous year in a given track.

Tracking doesn't need to be that permanent. My DD's advanced math class had kids moving up and down every single year, based on their end of year tests from the previous year, SOLs, teacher recommendations, grades, and the beginning of year placement tests. Even in 6th grade, a few kids moved up from 5th grade regular math the previous year to 6th advanced math based on their performance in 5th grade. Likewise, kids were regrouped each year for language arts based on their performance in the DRA and SOLs.

For middle and high school, all honors and AP classes should be opt in. The school should give recommendations, but ultimately, if a kid wants to work hard and try the higher level class, he or she should have the chance to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP is only laughable. You do not need it. Your schools will be fine without the program. Better even. Taking the top 20% of kids who are most prepped in 2nd grade is only creating a pseudo-private school that’s free for those who don’t want to pay. It is not a right you all deserve as public school patrons and it does a disservice to those kids not in the program. I’ve lived in Fairfax and then all around the US and abroad. So I’ve seen a lot of different public education.

This may be true. What is also true is that it's the parents of these kids that do most of the volunteer work at school and provide the support teachers need to keep the school at a higher level of performance. If AAP is gone, so will a lot of those volunteers. Race to the bottom!

So they’re bot trying to help “the school”, by your own admission. Otherwise why would they stop doing what they’re doing just because their kid has to be in class with the poors (oops, I mean if AAP goes away)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I generally support tracking, but your example hits on what I consider a major pitfall - the permanence of a decision to place a kid on a certain track. I think tracking is fine when there is expected and continual movement up and down based on performance the previous year in a given track.

Tracking doesn't need to be that permanent. My DD's advanced math class had kids moving up and down every single year, based on their end of year tests from the previous year, SOLs, teacher recommendations, grades, and the beginning of year placement tests. Even in 6th grade, a few kids moved up from 5th grade regular math the previous year to 6th advanced math based on their performance in 5th grade. Likewise, kids were regrouped each year for language arts based on their performance in the DRA and SOLs.

For middle and high school, all honors and AP classes should be opt in. The school should give recommendations, but ultimately, if a kid wants to work hard and try the higher level class, he or she should have the chance to do so.

in FCPS, AAP is a permanent designation. Removing it is virtually impossible, so you end up with some kids who should be there and some who shouldn't but with no way to move those who shouldn't down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I generally support tracking, but your example hits on what I consider a major pitfall - the permanence of a decision to place a kid on a certain track. I think tracking is fine when there is expected and continual movement up and down based on performance the previous year in a given track.

Tracking doesn't need to be that permanent. My DD's advanced math class had kids moving up and down every single year, based on their end of year tests from the previous year, SOLs, teacher recommendations, grades, and the beginning of year placement tests. Even in 6th grade, a few kids moved up from 5th grade regular math the previous year to 6th advanced math based on their performance in 5th grade. Likewise, kids were regrouped each year for language arts based on their performance in the DRA and SOLs.

For middle and high school, all honors and AP classes should be opt in. The school should give recommendations, but ultimately, if a kid wants to work hard and try the higher level class, he or she should have the chance to do so.

I think a system where kids are placed based on ability is great but am reminded of the kids who bought into the concept that they were not smart because they were in the lowest track. For many it becomes a self perpetuating belief. The ones who did not buy into the idea had parents who were engaged and helped their kids but that was, in my limited experience, a very small group. The education gap that people are trying to solve is not going to be addressed by tracking. The different tracks will be mainly defined by socio-economic/racial backgrounds because the kids are more likely to come from homes where education is not a priority for a long list of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Just because there are not many blacks at TJ doesn’t mean that there aren’t many smart black students in FCPS. This is totally SES and cultural. We used to live in Alexandria/Springfield and there was an African immigrant population whose parents cared very much for their children’s education. I was actually really surprised at how many black kids were at kumon. My very Americanized Asian kid moaned and groaned and we ended our kumon contract as soon as we could get out.

Indians are often darker skinned than Hispanics and African Americans.

I feel like Indians are the most discriminated against. I mean their skin is as dark as blacks yet they are never included in race as brown people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I think a system where kids are placed based on ability is great but am reminded of the kids who bought into the concept that they were not smart because they were in the lowest track. For many it becomes a self perpetuating belief. The ones who did not buy into the idea had parents who were engaged and helped their kids but that was, in my limited experience, a very small group. The education gap that people are trying to solve is not going to be addressed by tracking. The different tracks will be mainly defined by socio-economic/racial backgrounds because the kids are more likely to come from homes where education is not a priority for a long list of reasons.

Sure, but what's the solution? Holding other kids back so some kids don't feel bad is a terrible idea.

I'd rather see subject-by-subject tracking than across the board tracking (like AAP). I don't think kids would take the same hit to their self esteem if they were low in something, but high or at least average in other things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AAP is only laughable. You do not need it. Your schools will be fine without the program. Better even. Taking the top 20% of kids who are most prepped in 2nd grade is only creating a pseudo-private school that’s free for those who don’t want to pay. It is not a right you all deserve as public school patrons and it does a disservice to those kids not in the program. I’ve lived in Fairfax and then all around the US and abroad. So I’ve seen a lot of different public education.

Actually aap is a right based on fape for high iq

[Anonymous]

I heard there will be AAP classes in critical race theory, coming soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Actually aap is a right based on fape for high iq

In VA, gifted education is a right. The state mandate does not specify what makes a child gifted or how the gifted education is to be delivered. Infrequent gifted pull outs could be considered to meet the mandate for gifted education. Also, the determination of giftedness in VA has nothing whatsoever to do with IQ. Gifted is whatever the school system decides it is. This is why kids with high IQs and high other test scores get rejected, while kids with low scores are admitted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:AAP is only laughable. You do not need it. Your schools will be fine without the program. Better even. Taking the top 20% of kids who are most prepped in 2nd grade is only creating a pseudo-private school that’s free for those who don’t want to pay. It is not a right you all deserve as public school patrons and it does a disservice to those kids not in the program. I’ve lived in Fairfax and then all around the US and abroad. So I’ve seen a lot of different public education.

Actually aap is a right based on fape for high iq

a pull out one a week would satisfy the same right