APS Duran School Performance Email - Is Long Branch a Failing School?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

I don’t know if you work in a school. If you do the circumstances may be different from my school. It is not always a budget issue. sometimes the inclusion is supported with staff (i.e. 1:1 or even more) but it’s still not inappropriate placement. There are times in the inclusion model is more expensive than a self-contained model which they have been getting rid of in my decade aps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

I don’t know if you work in a school. If you do the circumstances may be different from my school. It is not always a budget issue. sometimes the inclusion is supported with staff (i.e. 1:1 or even more) but it’s still not inappropriate placement. There are times in the inclusion model is more expensive than a self-contained model which they have been getting rid of in my decade aps.

I don't know what you mean by "it's still not inappropriate placement." Can you explain? If it's not a budget issue, then what is it?

The inclusion model is almost always more expensive than self contained. APS did a study on this - are you familiar with it? And yes, the movement to get ride of self contained preceded Duran and is not just limited to APS. It's weird to blame him for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

I don’t know if you work in a school. If you do the circumstances may be different from my school. It is not always a budget issue. sometimes the inclusion is supported with staff (i.e. 1:1 or even more) but it’s still not inappropriate placement. There are times in the inclusion model is more expensive than a self-contained model which they have been getting rid of in my decade aps.

I don't know what you mean by "it's still not inappropriate placement." Can you explain? If it's not a budget issue, then what is it?

The inclusion model is almost always more expensive than self contained. APS did a study on this - are you familiar with it? And yes, the movement to get ride of self contained preceded Duran and is not just limited to APS. It's weird to blame him for this.

DP. You’re right, the inclusion model wasn’t Duran’s idea and isn’t limited to APS.

Perhaps the idealized version of inclusion is more expensive than self-contained classrooms. But the inclusion model how it’s ACTUALLY implemented? It’s significantly cheaper than self-contained. Otherwise, districts nationwide would’ve abandoned it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

I don’t know if you work in a school. If you do the circumstances may be different from my school. It is not always a budget issue. sometimes the inclusion is supported with staff (i.e. 1:1 or even more) but it’s still not inappropriate placement. There are times in the inclusion model is more expensive than a self-contained model which they have been getting rid of in my decade aps.

I don't know what you mean by "it's still not inappropriate placement." Can you explain? If it's not a budget issue, then what is it?

The inclusion model is almost always more expensive than self contained. APS did a study on this - are you familiar with it? And yes, the movement to get ride of self contained preceded Duran and is not just limited to APS. It's weird to blame him for this.

DP. You’re right, the inclusion model wasn’t Duran’s idea and isn’t limited to APS.

Perhaps the idealized version of inclusion is more expensive than self-contained classrooms. But the inclusion model how it’s ACTUALLY implemented? It’s significantly cheaper than self-contained. Otherwise, districts nationwide would’ve abandoned it!

I'm still trying to understand your problem with the inclusion model as is in APS. You said a few messages ago that you blame Duran for inclusion without support. I assumed you meant this was a staffing issue/budget issue but then you said it wasn't. What support do you want to see?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While I love the energy spent on Duran v Youngkin, it does seem like everyone here seems to agree that the addition of super intensified math 6 or pre-algebra, or whatever it's called - this is a GOOD thing, right? I don't care who gets credit for it, the point is to offer something that is, I don't know, good for our children? And good for learning?

So, with that in mind...since this addition can be viewed positively, is it too much to ask that Duran and the rest of the School Board here take heed of why this has been so successful or well received by the community, and do more to offer challenging additions to our curriculum for our high performers? And by that, yes, I mean, let's start earlier in the elementary schools and put some real meat in the gifted or academic coach program? (Again, I don't care what the hell you want to call this).

Grouping works. It's also intuitive, and it's also something that helps teachers. Kids who are not pulled into the smart group will feel bad. Ok. And? Why are we spending on this money, time and energy on SEL if they can't handle something like this? When they get to middle school, do they continue to feel bad when they're not in the Intensified classes? Or should we eliminate those too?

APS already does cluster gifted students together in elementary.

Yes, all "Advanced academics" activities are for the entire class though. They do not get any pull out or individual services (unless someone goes rogue). The gifted clusters are often in classes with the SPED/ELL cluster and in practice they can be ignored much of the time.

So, what is getting in the way of parents, teachers, principals appealing to Duran to change this? Are we really just stuck with this limitation until Duran is gone? And if so, how does one get rid of Duran?

Why are you so against Duran? He is the one you should be thanking for finally putting intensified classes in middle schools after the prior super would not. You are so clueless and clearly have a vendetta against duran. Still bitter from the pandemic huh?

I am staff and really liked Duran at the beginning but over time have turned. He has done a ton of mismanagement. His cabinet is huge, yet does very little to help us in the schools (sometimes actively make things worse). He’s pushing for more inclusion without support, things are changed last minute creating chaos and confusion, HR is a complete disaster.

This isn't Duran's fault. All levels of government are not funding schools sufficiently. Are you lobbying to change that? or just blaming the wrong person?

The things I’ve cited as my issues with him are not budget related (well unless you count paying the many layers of his cabinet)

You said you blame him for inclusion without support. Inclusion with the right staffing support is a budget item.

I don’t know if you work in a school. If you do the circumstances may be different from my school. It is not always a budget issue. sometimes the inclusion is supported with staff (i.e. 1:1 or even more) but it’s still not inappropriate placement. There are times in the inclusion model is more expensive than a self-contained model which they have been getting rid of in my decade aps.

I don't know what you mean by "it's still not inappropriate placement." Can you explain? If it's not a budget issue, then what is it?

The inclusion model is almost always more expensive than self contained. APS did a study on this - are you familiar with it? And yes, the movement to get ride of self contained preceded Duran and is not just limited to APS. It's weird to blame him for this.

DP. You’re right, the inclusion model wasn’t Duran’s idea and isn’t limited to APS.

Perhaps the idealized version of inclusion is more expensive than self-contained classrooms. But the inclusion model how it’s ACTUALLY implemented? It’s significantly cheaper than self-contained. Otherwise, districts nationwide would’ve abandoned it!

I'm still trying to understand your problem with the inclusion model as is in APS. You said a few messages ago that you blame Duran for inclusion without support. I assumed you meant this was a staffing issue/budget issue but then you said it wasn't. What support do you want to see?

You’re responding to different people. Hence, the DP.

[Anonymous]

Separating kids by ability saves money, and whether you like it or not, we don’t have infinite funding. (Though APS spends more per student than most systems nationwide!)

We can’t — and shouldn’t — allocate most of our funding toward initiatives that serve only to make people feel good. Money should be spent on getting the greatest number of students ready to be productive adults with meaningful work. Spending loads on ineffective inclusion practices at the expense of REAL learning for capable/motivated students makes absolutely no sense.

There will always be a need for differentiation in classrooms, but when teachers have ENORMOUS gaps in ability (like kids who speak no English, or kids who have massive behavioral issues that disrupt the entire class), no learning is happening for anyone. That must stop.

Put kids in different classrooms. Scrap language immersion schools and have all students who lack English proficiency attend classes that are geared toward language acquisition until they can move over to the Gen Ed classrooms.

There are such wide ranges of special ed. Plenty of kids are capable of inclusion in gen ed with REASONABLE supports (extra time on tests, different seating options, etc). *We cannot provide everyone a 1:1 aide!* Many sped students need to be in dedicated sped classrooms. That’s just reality.

Then we need to discuss the students who have massive behavioral issues NOT due to an actual disability but due to family culture/poor parenting. Bring back alternative schools! These students should ONLY be allowed to attend their neighborhood school when they can demonstrate ability to behave appropriately, like they will have to do as an adult in the real world!

Parents have no stake in the game when our system runs with no accountability or consequences. For some, they will go back to parenting their kids if they realize their child’s future is going to be GRIM otherwise.

[Anonymous]

new APS math adoption selection for next year- options will be available for perusal on Wednesday 1/14 at Kenmore for perusal. 1-7:30 PM open to the public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:new APS math adoption selection for next year- options will be available for perusal on Wednesday 1/14 at Kenmore for perusal. 1-7:30 PM open to the public.

Are program names available on the website? Thanks for the heads up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Separating kids by ability saves money, and whether you like it or not, we don’t have infinite funding. (Though APS spends more per student than most systems nationwide!)

We can’t — and shouldn’t — allocate most of our funding toward initiatives that serve only to make people feel good. Money should be spent on getting the greatest number of students ready to be productive adults with meaningful work. Spending loads on ineffective inclusion practices at the expense of REAL learning for capable/motivated students makes absolutely no sense.

There will always be a need for differentiation in classrooms, but when teachers have ENORMOUS gaps in ability (like kids who speak no English, or kids who have massive behavioral issues that disrupt the entire class), no learning is happening for anyone. That must stop.

Put kids in different classrooms. Scrap language immersion schools and have all students who lack English proficiency attend classes that are geared toward language acquisition until they can move over to the Gen Ed classrooms.

There are such wide ranges of special ed. Plenty of kids are capable of inclusion in gen ed with REASONABLE supports (extra time on tests, different seating options, etc). *We cannot provide everyone a 1:1 aide!* Many sped students need to be in dedicated sped classrooms. That’s just reality.

Then we need to discuss the students who have massive behavioral issues NOT due to an actual disability but due to family culture/poor parenting. Bring back alternative schools! These students should ONLY be allowed to attend their neighborhood school when they can demonstrate ability to behave appropriately, like they will have to do as an adult in the real world!

Parents have no stake in the game when our system runs with no accountability or consequences. For some, they will go back to parenting their kids if they realize their child’s future is going to be GRIM otherwise.

THIS. Exactly this.

When a teacher has 17 kids in the class, and 4 don’t speak English, and 4 have severe special needs, and 2 have severe behavioral issues, nobody wins. The teacher is pulled in too many directions even with pop-ins from support teachers. The kids who don’t speak English continue to fall behind, the kids with special needs are never going to actually be able to keep up, and the kids with behavioral issues (and their parents) are not held accountable. Out of the 5 left, one or two gets gifted services (which means nothing) and the others drift. So the parents of those who can afford it have to get tutors. This principal’s obsession with equity doesn’t help the situation. No homework at all even in 5th grade - her rationale is that some kids don’t have parents to help them with it at home, so in order to be fair, nobody gets it. She’s not responsible for district wide policies, but she’s not helping the situation. Kids leave Long Branch not ready for Middle School all the way around.