Dr. Duran must go

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:From my view since he got here:

Move to DIEBELS and math inventory. Relying on PALS was a joke. We used to get no objective info on math progress.
Move away from crap-tastic Lucy Calkins curriculum and back to teaching reading properly.
Middle school intensified classes (this is huge and if you're not there yet you don't know how huge it is)
Much clearer and more consistent communication about things I actually care about
The recent announcement about the ability to lock down the school ipads and laptops at home is a big improvement
I am impressed with his budget proposal this year and how much it is focused on the reality of the drug and mental health situations in the middle high schools. Some things that should make a real difference.

Eh the move to phonics based instruction was state mandated, not anything to do with Duran although I agree that phonics instruction IS reading instruction, I wouldn't give that to Duran as a win. I also am not anti-Duran, but cautiously optimistic that after growing central office, he will start to control and tame the beast. I'm willing to give him more time especially in the current hiring environment.

Nope APS did this, it was not state driven.

There is a law. Did you not know?
https://www.doe.virginia.gov/teaching-learning-assessment/k-12-standards-instruction/english-reading-literacy/literacy/virginia-literacy-act

I’ll give you that both Aps and FCPS started early but it was pushed by many factors. It isn’t Duran acting by himself. The NAACP
Had a big role.

Yes there is a law but APS made the change BEFORE the law. Advocates pushed this for years but got nowhere until Duran came in. Did you not know this?

There are a lot of johnny come latelies who only started paying attention to their kids' education when schools closed. This is probably one of then. The OP is probably another. People have no clue how bad the PE teacher was. Did they complain back then? Doubt it.

NP here. This is just a general response to your comment, but I’ve seen a lot of similar comments in this forum and other groups that are negative about newcomers/people just now paying attention. I’ve had someone shut down my criticisms because the prior superintendent was apparently pretty bad from what I can glean and I guess I didn’t know enough about the past history of APS prior to the pandemic.

But … my oldest started K in 2020. We moved here late 2019. This is a transient area. So a lot of the “Johnny come latelies” may be parents who didn’t even live here or have kids in school prior to Duran. I’m a bit tired of this discourse from older parents shutting down newer parents from having any opinions about what is currently going on in APS.

I’ve made comments before that some parents only started to pay attention during the pandemic. I was referring to specific parents I know who already had kids in APS and really didn’t GAF about school at all before covid. Like never even attended a PTA meeting. Then all of the sudden they are experts on schools/students/teachers and tried to aggressively force teachers/staff to obey them even though they were clueless. And they got ugly about it. Most have gone back to not GAF but some still try to force their (uninformed) opinions on the rest of us.

No, the problem was that the parents involved in APS pre-pandemic were not representative of the school system whatsoever. Like when 75% choose an in-person option in the Fall 2020, the parents on AEM are very opposed to going back and no APS org says anything to support the parents.

And now many parents have woken up that they do need to pay attention. Hence the focus on what's happening now.

I do think you have some Tony Romo like-issues with Superintendents though (Cowboys could never get rid of him because you couldn't get another better quarterback). Who else are we going to get?!? Is there anyone good even available? How long will it take them to get up to speed?

At least Durán knows APS, knows the community, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To cut to the chase, what will this mean for UVA admissions from APS?

It means high schools grades will be inflated to the point grades won't matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

Giving kids who lack quiet study areas and parents who can hep the opportunity to excel would mean doing things like having after school study areas with teachers paid to stick around or other models. It doesn't mean give every kid 50% even if they never do the work or even show up to class and give them endless retakes. This is the problem with so-called grading for equity. The book identifies real issues but the solutions are ridiculous and completely out of touch. The author is making alot of money off this book with districts buying his bookand then hiring consultants to figure out how to implement it. Talk to teachers. Lots of them don't like it in practice. One more thing being pushed down from Syphax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Teachers from Wakefield High School sent a letter to the Arlington County Superintendent that said the proposal is anything but equitable and would impact the neediest of students as they prepare for the future.

Dear Arlington School Board members and Dr. Duran:

As educators with decades of experience in APS, we are extremely concerned with several changes proposed in the new grading and homework policy. We believe that these changes will impact student learning and socio-emotional development and growth in a negative way. The changes, if implemented, will also result in the decline of high expectations and rigor in the classroom across all APS high schools. We agree that homework, summer assignments, summative as well as formative assessments need to be meaningful, engaging, and be clearly communicated/explained to students and their families; however, if proposed changes are implemented, the accountability “piece” of the learning process will exist in theory only.

In addition to learning how to construct an effective argument in writing, solve math equations, or properly conduct science experiments, as students matriculate through high school, they also learn how to develop organizational, time and stress management skills and grow as responsible, civically engaged, and considerate young adults. To achieve these ends, students should be held accountable for completing their work in a timely manner and meeting deadlines that were reasonably established by their teachers. We pride ourselves on providing useful constructive criticism for our students, analyzing and reflecting on major content and skill-based assignments and providing them with exemplary work from their classmates. We do not see how this practice can continue if the “timeliness of the completion” is not considered in the submission and grading process. Of course, practical/pragmatic elements come into play here as well:

1.If deadlines are removed (or, perhaps more accurately, able to be extended throughout the marking period/semester/school year), the potential certainly exists for a nightmare evaluating scenario for teachers, as submissions are delayed to suit students’ needs (and whims). This process will be compounded if, as stipulated in this proposal, such “remediations” can only be catalyzed via a “formal” two-way exchange between teacher and student.

2.More often than not, content and concepts lead to new content and concepts -- in other words, the material we access in one week organically fosters the material we will access the following week. If students are able to manufacture their own sequence of submissions, it seems logical that doing so would hamper “mastery” moving forward.

We agree with the idea that formative assessments must not count as much as summative assessments. However, we completely disagree with the proposal that none of the formative work should be counted towards a student’s achievement/ grade. It is very likely that students who do not complete or do a poor job with formative assessments will not do well on summative assessments either. So, again, that accountability element should remain to encourage students to stay focused and participate in the learning process consistently. Furthermore, students who exhibit reduced motivation to complete/submit formative work seem hardly likely to increase said motivation with the removal of grades; in fact, students often are able to augment less-than-exemplary scores on summative assessments with successful completion of formative work. Anecdotally, the Spring 2020 virtual learning experiment during the pandemic taught most of us that students do not, will not, complete work if it’s not for a grade.

Moreover, students come to school with various levels of motivation, abilities, background knowledge and work ethic. We, as professionals, need to be aware of these differences and work to facilitate learning and academic growth in each and every one of our students. When deadlines are clearly communicated with students, we expect them to honor those deadlines, and, if they are unable to do so, we expect them to communicate that with us in a timely fashion, so that necessary adjustments can be made based on individual circumstances. However, what message do these proposed policies send to students if they do not complete their work in a timely manner and still get 50% for their missing work? What message do these policies send to a student who met deadlines and received a lower grade than a student who ignored the deadline entirely?

How do we reconcile these policy changes with our efforts to prepare students for the challenges of their post-secondary school lives--challenges which certainly involve deadlines as well as successful completion of assigned tasks? In reality, students use very little of the factual information that they acquire in high school in their daily lives. However, the habits of mind (acquiring and synthesizing information) and work habits (timely attendance, work completion, positive participation in group activities) make for successful careers.

Finally, given the emphasis on equity in today’s education systems, we believe that some of the proposed changes will actually have a detrimental impact towards achieving this goal. Families that have means could still provide challenging and engaging academic experiences for their children and will continue to do so, especially if their child(ren) are not experiencing expected rigor in the classroom. More specifically, those families can afford to hire tutors and sign-up their child(ren) to attend enrichment activities and camps in hopes of preparing them for the college application/admission process. Students who come from families which are not as “savvy” or “aware,” will be subject to further disadvantage because they will not be held accountable for not completing their homework assignments and/or formative assessments according to the deadlines set by their teachers: such results are anything but equitable--conversely, they offer our most needy students reduced probability of preparing for and realizing post-secondary opportunities.

If the discussed changes are implemented, instead of holding students to high academic and personal standards, we are providing them with a variety of excuses and/or enabling them to “game the system,” prompting them to expect the least of themselves in terms of effort, results, and responsibility. At Wakefield, in particular, we believe these proposed changes fly directly in the face of the very pillars upon which our Mission Statement sits.

Sincerely,

[Wakefield High School Teachers]

link: https://wjla.com/news/crisis-in-the-classrooms/va-teachers-push-back-on-equity-proposal-to-abolish-some-grades-late-homework-penalties

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

Giving kids who lack quiet study areas and parents who can hep the opportunity to excel would mean doing things like having after school study areas with teachers paid to stick around or other models. It doesn't mean give every kid 50% even if they never do the work or even show up to class and give them endless retakes. This is the problem with so-called grading for equity. The book identifies real issues but the solutions are ridiculous and completely out of touch. The author is making alot of money off this book with districts buying his bookand then hiring consultants to figure out how to implement it. Talk to teachers. Lots of them don't like it in practice. One more thing being pushed down from Syphax.

100% agree with PP. Grading for Equity will hurt disadvantaged students the most, much similar to what Lucy Calkins has done. Now that we stopped the cult following of Lucy Calkins, we joined a new cult called "grading for equity", except this new cult will be much more damaging than Lucy Calkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

Wow, who are you? I have not found a single APS teacher who liked/supports this new mandate. Are all those APS teachers right wing?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Teachers from Wakefield High School sent a letter to the Arlington County Superintendent that said the proposal is anything but equitable and would impact the neediest of students as they prepare for the future.

Dear Arlington School Board members and Dr. Duran:

As educators with decades of experience in APS, we are extremely concerned with several changes proposed in the new grading and homework policy. We believe that these changes will impact student learning and socio-emotional development and growth in a negative way. The changes, if implemented, will also result in the decline of high expectations and rigor in the classroom across all APS high schools. We agree that homework, summer assignments, summative as well as formative assessments need to be meaningful, engaging, and be clearly communicated/explained to students and their families; however, if proposed changes are implemented, the accountability “piece” of the learning process will exist in theory only.

In addition to learning how to construct an effective argument in writing, solve math equations, or properly conduct science experiments, as students matriculate through high school, they also learn how to develop organizational, time and stress management skills and grow as responsible, civically engaged, and considerate young adults. To achieve these ends, students should be held accountable for completing their work in a timely manner and meeting deadlines that were reasonably established by their teachers. We pride ourselves on providing useful constructive criticism for our students, analyzing and reflecting on major content and skill-based assignments and providing them with exemplary work from their classmates. We do not see how this practice can continue if the “timeliness of the completion” is not considered in the submission and grading process. Of course, practical/pragmatic elements come into play here as well:

1.If deadlines are removed (or, perhaps more accurately, able to be extended throughout the marking period/semester/school year), the potential certainly exists for a nightmare evaluating scenario for teachers, as submissions are delayed to suit students’ needs (and whims). This process will be compounded if, as stipulated in this proposal, such “remediations” can only be catalyzed via a “formal” two-way exchange between teacher and student.

2.More often than not, content and concepts lead to new content and concepts -- in other words, the material we access in one week organically fosters the material we will access the following week. If students are able to manufacture their own sequence of submissions, it seems logical that doing so would hamper “mastery” moving forward.

We agree with the idea that formative assessments must not count as much as summative assessments. However, we completely disagree with the proposal that none of the formative work should be counted towards a student’s achievement/ grade. It is very likely that students who do not complete or do a poor job with formative assessments will not do well on summative assessments either. So, again, that accountability element should remain to encourage students to stay focused and participate in the learning process consistently. Furthermore, students who exhibit reduced motivation to complete/submit formative work seem hardly likely to increase said motivation with the removal of grades; in fact, students often are able to augment less-than-exemplary scores on summative assessments with successful completion of formative work. Anecdotally, the Spring 2020 virtual learning experiment during the pandemic taught most of us that students do not, will not, complete work if it’s not for a grade.

Moreover, students come to school with various levels of motivation, abilities, background knowledge and work ethic. We, as professionals, need to be aware of these differences and work to facilitate learning and academic growth in each and every one of our students. When deadlines are clearly communicated with students, we expect them to honor those deadlines, and, if they are unable to do so, we expect them to communicate that with us in a timely fashion, so that necessary adjustments can be made based on individual circumstances. However, what message do these proposed policies send to students if they do not complete their work in a timely manner and still get 50% for their missing work? What message do these policies send to a student who met deadlines and received a lower grade than a student who ignored the deadline entirely?

How do we reconcile these policy changes with our efforts to prepare students for the challenges of their post-secondary school lives--challenges which certainly involve deadlines as well as successful completion of assigned tasks? In reality, students use very little of the factual information that they acquire in high school in their daily lives. However, the habits of mind (acquiring and synthesizing information) and work habits (timely attendance, work completion, positive participation in group activities) make for successful careers.

Finally, given the emphasis on equity in today’s education systems, we believe that some of the proposed changes will actually have a detrimental impact towards achieving this goal. Families that have means could still provide challenging and engaging academic experiences for their children and will continue to do so, especially if their child(ren) are not experiencing expected rigor in the classroom. More specifically, those families can afford to hire tutors and sign-up their child(ren) to attend enrichment activities and camps in hopes of preparing them for the college application/admission process. Students who come from families which are not as “savvy” or “aware,” will be subject to further disadvantage because they will not be held accountable for not completing their homework assignments and/or formative assessments according to the deadlines set by their teachers: such results are anything but equitable--conversely, they offer our most needy students reduced probability of preparing for and realizing post-secondary opportunities.

If the discussed changes are implemented, instead of holding students to high academic and personal standards, we are providing them with a variety of excuses and/or enabling them to “game the system,” prompting them to expect the least of themselves in terms of effort, results, and responsibility. At Wakefield, in particular, we believe these proposed changes fly directly in the face of the very pillars upon which our Mission Statement sits.

Sincerely,

[Wakefield High School Teachers]

link: https://wjla.com/news/crisis-in-the-classrooms/va-teachers-push-back-on-equity-proposal-to-abolish-some-grades-late-homework-penalties

People need to take a minute and read that letter and understand what teachers in our largest and more diverse high school think about this policy.

[Anonymous]

"grading for equity" will have a massive negative impact on student learning. APS parents will be horrified to learn what it entails. Someone should start a new thread so the topic is more visible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To cut to the chase, what will this mean for UVA admissions from APS?

This new standards based grading isn’t exactly compatible with AP and IB which are quite demanding and have tests with no retakes. That much I know.

It won’t apply to IB because of the standards required there. APS pretty much setting up, or some might say reinforcing, a two tier system. Some kids, mostly white and UMC, will get rigorous classes that prepare them for college. Everyone else will get even more watered down classes with even lower expectations. All in the name of equity. Who wins? Probably not teachers, definitely not students. Duran and syphax probably as they can say they “fixed” the achievement gap.

This system is in place in Alexandria City.

You are correct about the two tier system. It's been that way for a long time.

It doesn't really help much though and test scores are still bad for the same sub groups who had bad test scores before.

The only equity schools can offer is to provide the same high standard of education to all and acknowledge they aren't raising the child. That's the parents job and the family values and guidance they provide is going to outweigh what the school does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

There are elements of the new approach that might have merit on their own, like emphasizing final assessments over lots of little assignments and homework completion, or giving people some opportunities to re-take tests. Taken together, though, the whole "Grading for Equity" approach reads more like magical thinking, because the claim seems to be that all these changes will close the achievement gap.

Advocates seem to think that the "achievement gap" is this thing that exists on paper because the way we grade students and assign weight to different assignments disadvantages kids from disadvantaged backgrounds. Those disadvantaged kids ought to have the same potential so any grading system that doesn't demonstrate that fact by statistically similar outcomes is ipso facto inequitable.

The proof will be in the pudding, too, because whatever system is going to adopt this will still have students taking SATs and participating in NAEP assessments. And when they start showing huge differences in actual abilities among kids who are graduating, it will be clear that all these changes have done is serve to obscure where the deficiencies are.

Changing the way kids are graded doesn't change the way they're taught, and it doesn't change what they've learned. And it certainly hasn't done anything to help with the issues at home preventing them from reaching their full potential. The net result is just going to be making kids who aren't actually excelling feel like they are. And that's an absolutely terrible outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

There are elements of the new approach that might have merit on their own, like emphasizing final assessments over lots of little assignments and homework completion, or giving people some opportunities to re-take tests. Taken together, though, the whole "Grading for Equity" approach reads more like magical thinking, because the claim seems to be that all these changes will close the achievement gap.

Advocates seem to think that the "achievement gap" is this thing that exists on paper because the way we grade students and assign weight to different assignments disadvantages kids from disadvantaged backgrounds. Those disadvantaged kids ought to have the same potential so any grading system that doesn't demonstrate that fact by statistically similar outcomes is ipso facto inequitable.

The proof will be in the pudding, too, because whatever system is going to adopt this will still have students taking SATs and participating in NAEP assessments. And when they start showing huge differences in actual abilities among kids who are graduating, it will be clear that all these changes have done is serve to obscure where the deficiencies are.

Changing the way kids are graded doesn't change the way they're taught, and it doesn't change what they've learned. And it certainly hasn't done anything to help with the issues at home preventing them from reaching their full potential. The net result is just going to be making kids who aren't actually excelling feel like they are. And that's an absolutely terrible outcome.

+100

[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:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

There are elements of the new approach that might have merit on their own, like emphasizing final assessments over lots of little assignments and homework completion, or giving people some opportunities to re-take tests. Taken together, though, the whole "Grading for Equity" approach reads more like magical thinking, because the claim seems to be that all these changes will close the achievement gap.

Advocates seem to think that the "achievement gap" is this thing that exists on paper because the way we grade students and assign weight to different assignments disadvantages kids from disadvantaged backgrounds. Those disadvantaged kids ought to have the same potential so any grading system that doesn't demonstrate that fact by statistically similar outcomes is ipso facto inequitable.

The proof will be in the pudding, too, because whatever system is going to adopt this will still have students taking SATs and participating in NAEP assessments. And when they start showing huge differences in actual abilities among kids who are graduating, it will be clear that all these changes have done is serve to obscure where the deficiencies are.

Changing the way kids are graded doesn't change the way they're taught, and it doesn't change what they've learned. And it certainly hasn't done anything to help with the issues at home preventing them from reaching their full potential. The net result is just going to be making kids who aren't actually excelling feel like they are. And that's an absolutely terrible outcome.

+100

The goal of "grading for equity" is to ARTIFICIALLY close the achievement gap. Students who normally would fail a course are now passing (because remember, even if a student does NOTHING, they get 50%, doing just a little can get you to 60% easily). Ask your kids what they think of getting 50% on an assignment they didn't do at all. I bet they'll agree this is dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

I am a former teacher and my kids went to Title 1 schools in Arlington. Giving everyone an automatic 50% for doing absolutely nothing isn't helping the students who don't have support at home, places to study, etc. We need to do the exact opposite and raise expectations and give supports to the students who don't have them. All the 50% policy does is give students the message that they aren't good/smart enough to do well in school.



Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

Giving kids who lack quiet study areas and parents who can hep the opportunity to excel would mean doing things like having after school study areas with teachers paid to stick around or other models. It doesn't mean give every kid 50% even if they never do the work or even show up to class and give them endless retakes. This is the problem with so-called grading for equity. The book identifies real issues but the solutions are ridiculous and completely out of touch. The author is making alot of money off this book with districts buying his bookand then hiring consultants to figure out how to implement it. Talk to teachers. Lots of them don't like it in practice. One more thing being pushed down from Syphax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duran isn't perfect butt he's the best we've have maybe since Smith. Certainly better than Murphy. New parents here who are outraged should take a breath. It's a long, hard slog, and you'll come to appreciate APS is better than most.

I agree. Plus with the shortage of superintendent candidates, the 10 million dollar lawsuit, the outdoor lab incident and a recent overdose there’s zero chance we could get someone better

You think the lawsuit and outdoor lab incident and overdose are bad? wait till y'all find out about "grading for equity" that APS is mandating and what it means (don't be fooled by that name), hold tight parents.

It's not "grading for equity".

Do you mean it’s not *called* grading for equity, or that it’s not grading for *actual* equity? And can someone tell us the basics of this thing?

+ 1 - can someone please explain the new policy and why it's bad?

Because no one fails so they all fail. They’re bringing everyone down to the lowest level. If you can’t understand what that’s bad I can’t help you.

Mastery based grading is another name for this. Letter grades are dropped in favor of descriptions of the level of mastery attained. There are no failures or negative assessments. Most public school districts and some private schools are adopting aspects of this equitable and revolutionary grading system all over the country. It’s a learning process by many schools to see what works for their student population. But so far according to compiled data, this new grading system has successfully reduced the achievement gap for the first time: less A grades (or the equivalent) and no failures. Check out the book by leading proponent and educator Joe Feldman: Grading for Equity: What It Is, Why It Matters, and How It Can Transform Schools and Classrooms

While are a number of bespoke versions of the mastery or skills based grading, there are a number of commonalities.

In general, soft skills no longer factor into grades: These include study habits, classroom participation, tardiness, attendance, classroom behavior, homework completion, etc. Assessments solely focus on the mastery of subject matter, and nothing else.

A final assessment accounts for roughly 90% of the grade. And unlimited retests (and tutoring if needed) are offered to students to increase their level of mastery.

Notably teachers are pushing back against this new grading system that ignores soft skills and prioritizes an end of term assessment. But there are proponents among parents and school administrators.

Thank you for taking the time to explain this. Is there a link to it? I'm a pretty involved parent, I though, but I can't find it.

It's called "equity based" because it gives the opportunity for students who don't have full supports at home -- quiet study areas, parents who can help with homework -- the opportunity to excel. This doesn't diminish the opportunity for YOUR student to excel. This message that equity-based is lowering standards is a right wing talking point.

Supporting students can be done without changing the grading system. And, btw, lots of kids without quiet study areas or parents who can help them with their chemistry at home are also high-achieving students. A lot of kids intentionally study and do their work with loud music playing or in front of the TV. This "lacking home situation" flag does not persuade me in the least. this less-structured and abstract grading system also is, IMO, actually MORE subjective than 90 =A, etc. system. If the teacher doesn't have specific guidelines and communicate them promptly and clearly to the student, it absolutely does diminish the opportunity for students - of any background - to truly excel.