Are AP-type classes racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Phasing them out would seem to be the logical extension of a march toward equity and a reduced emphasis on tests.



There is nothing logical about what you are proposing, which would be a race to the bottom. Our society is based on hard work and achievement, and we must offer difficult coursework to our students--ALL OF THEM-- to keep them competitive in a global economy.

If students of color need extra help succeeding in these courses, then that's what they should get.




Are you saying that students of color are incapable of success without, as you put it, “extra help succeeding??”

No. And if that's what you took from my post, you could use a remedial reading class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the people who want to do with away with AP classes think that “equity” means that everyone learns less and at a lower level.

Clearly these people think children of color aren’t capable of taking AP classes. There is no other explanation for this stupid proposition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So the people who want to do with away with AP classes think that “equity” means that everyone learns less and at a lower level.

It is not what some people “want.”

It is what many school districts are actually doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

My (white) kids went to Title I schools that were majority-minority for elementary and middle school and I agree. Two of the problems we saw -- lower-income kids move around a lot. They may not go to the same school for more than a year or two in a row, so they spend a lot of time getting re-assessed, and the principals can't assign them to classes with teachers who will be a good fit, and they don't form relationships with counselors or others who look out for them....all the things that middle-class kids from stable households experience.

Also, the teachers in Title 1 schools don't last long either, if they have the chance to move to a different school many of them move on. Our elementary school went through four principals over the 10 years my kids attended. So again, even for the kids who do stay in the neighborhood long-term, they don't have the consistency that lets people really learn their strengths and weaknesses and provide the supports and programs they need to help them.

It's always stop-and-start, and all those breaks add up. Combined with less support at home for many of them, particularly the ones whose parents have limited education, and it means they are significantly behind middle class kids by the time they get to high school just because they haven't had a consistent, intensive focus on their development from all of the adults in their lives that wealthier kids in more affluent schools experience.

I hear you on the moving around thing. Isn't it amazing that we can send men and women to the Space Center to circle the world at 17,000+ miles per hour but school systems don't have a way to send electronic records to each other when a student moves from one place to another? Seems like the second would be much easier than the first. And that would help a lot with the assessment issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

My (white) kids went to Title I schools that were majority-minority for elementary and middle school and I agree. Two of the problems we saw -- lower-income kids move around a lot. They may not go to the same school for more than a year or two in a row, so they spend a lot of time getting re-assessed, and the principals can't assign them to classes with teachers who will be a good fit, and they don't form relationships with counselors or others who look out for them....all the things that middle-class kids from stable households experience.

Also, the teachers in Title 1 schools don't last long either, if they have the chance to move to a different school many of them move on. Our elementary school went through four principals over the 10 years my kids attended. So again, even for the kids who do stay in the neighborhood long-term, they don't have the consistency that lets people really learn their strengths and weaknesses and provide the supports and programs they need to help them.

It's always stop-and-start, and all those breaks add up. Combined with less support at home for many of them, particularly the ones whose parents have limited education, and it means they are significantly behind middle class kids by the time they get to high school just because they haven't had a consistent, intensive focus on their development from all of the adults in their lives that wealthier kids in more affluent schools experience.

I hear you on the moving around thing. Isn't it amazing that we can send men and women to the Space Center to circle the world at 17,000+ miles per hour but school systems don't have a way to send electronic records to each other when a student moves from one place to another? Seems like the second would be much easier than the first. And that would help a lot with the assessment issue.

First off - as far as records transfer goes, it’s not that simple because many of the Title 1 students are not in the country lawfully. And

Second - privacy laws.

Finally, in the case of Title 1, the parents may not be literate or, even if they are, they may not speak English.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

You need to start prior to that. Students from low-income homes (white and black) enter school below grade level. It is a constant race to catch up to expectations. Very bright kids can and do catch up with no extra intervention. Many others have the deck stacked against them. Poor attendance, lots of mobility, etc. These reasons and others prevent them from catching up. If you want these kids to reach their full potential, intervention needs to start in the home from the very beginning. I teach in a Title 1 school and we have a 3-year-old program. Students are assessed three times per year for receptive vocabulary. Native English speakers of all races typically enter the program with a receptive vocabulary of an 18-month-old. These students are typically developing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP. Phasing them out would seem to be the logical extension of a march toward equity and a reduced emphasis on tests.

Why wouldn’t the solution be to get more kids to the AP level?

Because the designation is a farce. It's one thing to recognize that, for any number of reasons, some students struggle academically; it's another to inflate the achievements and credentials of students who, for any number of reasons, struggle less and perform as their parents and teachers expect them to.

Calling a course advanced does not mean that the students are actually advanced. Moreover, many AP students falsely and unwittingly begin to believe that they are academically advanced when they are in fact academically average. In practice, this often means that white students and parents develop an artificial sense of superiority.

What is your experience with AP courses and AP exams?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

You need to start prior to that. Students from low-income homes (white and black) enter school below grade level. It is a constant race to catch up to expectations. Very bright kids can and do catch up with no extra intervention. Many others have the deck stacked against them. Poor attendance, lots of mobility, etc. These reasons and others prevent them from catching up. If you want these kids to reach their full potential, intervention needs to start in the home from the very beginning. I teach in a Title 1 school and we have a 3-year-old program. Students are assessed three times per year for receptive vocabulary. Native English speakers of all races typically enter the program with a receptive vocabulary of an 18-month-old. These students are typically developing.

Exacerbated by the "anti-tracking" movement. These kids can learn to read, but don't have background knowledge to understand what they are reading. This is why scores diverge again after 3rd grade. We need to have a recognition first, that K-8 classrooms need to be all about content of all types (foundational stories, science, history, geography, art, poems), not so-called "critical thinking skills" which no one can define, and which you need actual knowledge to achieve. And second, that kids who start K without some really basic knowledge of things like animals and colors, etc. should be in their own class where they can gain those pre-school skills and then move forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the people who want to do with away with AP classes think that “equity” means that everyone learns less and at a lower level.

Clearly these people think children of color aren’t capable of taking AP classes. There is no other explanation for this stupid proposition.

And this is the problem. So many adults, including and especially including their own family members, do not think people of color can achieve anything that is great, including get on an honor roll and take AP courses, or get into a magnet program. These low expectations are killing kids of color. They need affirmation, they need coaching or pep talks, they need someone to believe in them. Think about all the negative things that they experience or their ACES compared to white children and to top it off, low expectations from a lot of people they meet. Kids are not dumb, they know when little is expected of them. It is a mindset problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

You need to start prior to that. Students from low-income homes (white and black) enter school below grade level. It is a constant race to catch up to expectations. Very bright kids can and do catch up with no extra intervention. Many others have the deck stacked against them. Poor attendance, lots of mobility, etc. These reasons and others prevent them from catching up. If you want these kids to reach their full potential, intervention needs to start in the home from the very beginning. I teach in a Title 1 school and we have a 3-year-old program. Students are assessed three times per year for receptive vocabulary. Native English speakers of all races typically enter the program with a receptive vocabulary of an 18-month-old. These students are typically developing.

Exacerbated by the "anti-tracking" movement. These kids can learn to read, but don't have background knowledge to understand what they are reading. This is why scores diverge again after 3rd grade. We need to have a recognition first, that K-8 classrooms need to be all about content of all types (foundational stories, science, history, geography, art, poems), not so-called "critical thinking skills" which no one can define, and which you need actual knowledge to achieve. And second, that kids who start K without some really basic knowledge of things like animals and colors, etc. should be in their own class where they can gain those pre-school skills and then move forward.

Dr. Robert Slavin is the source of the “anti-tracking” movement.

He has lead the attack on AP and all talent identification programs in public education for the last 4 decades.

Unlike Dr Slavin, I believe each child deserves an education geared to their own personal abilities.

Unfortunately, Dr. Slavin’s ideas are gaining popularity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So the people who want to do with away with AP classes think that “equity” means that everyone learns less and at a lower level.

Clearly these people think children of color aren’t capable of taking AP classes. There is no other explanation for this stupid proposition.

And this is the problem. So many adults, including and especially including their own family members, do not think people of color can achieve anything that is great, including get on an honor roll and take AP courses, or get into a magnet program. These low expectations are killing kids of color. They need affirmation, they need coaching or pep talks, they need someone to believe in them. Think about all the negative things that they experience or their ACES compared to white children and to top it off, low expectations from a lot of people they meet. Kids are not dumb, they know when little is expected of them. It is a mindset problem.

It should come from their families.

[Anonymous]

I'm surprised that you can't elect in. I am from another state and kids were allowed to just elect to take whatever AP course they wanted (within reason- you couldn't take AP bio without a prior bio course or AP calc BC without taking Calc AB first). Counselors worked with kids on choosing their course load too.

Also, the district paid for all tests. It seems a real equity problem when students need to pay for their AP tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

You need to start prior to that. Students from low-income homes (white and black) enter school below grade level. It is a constant race to catch up to expectations. Very bright kids can and do catch up with no extra intervention. Many others have the deck stacked against them. Poor attendance, lots of mobility, etc. These reasons and others prevent them from catching up. If you want these kids to reach their full potential, intervention needs to start in the home from the very beginning. I teach in a Title 1 school and we have a 3-year-old program. Students are assessed three times per year for receptive vocabulary. Native English speakers of all races typically enter the program with a receptive vocabulary of an 18-month-old. These students are typically developing.

Yes. A 2 generation approach to reduce trauma in the home and promote healthy safe parental attachment and responsiveness would help bring some of the children to school ready to learn at grade level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a teacher in a school system that does have significant racial inequities. My observation is that the problem isn't that "AP-type classes (are) raciest" as much as it is that the pathway to get to AP classes begins with TAG selection in elementary grades, and the TAG identification process is without a doubt racist and inequitable.

This.
We keep identifying problems yet refusing to address root causes. You can’t fix inequity in HS, college, or beyond by putting on band aids.
Dumbing down AP classes helps no one. Neither does taking them away. You want more kids to be ready for AP? Fix early education.

You need to start prior to that. Students from low-income homes (white and black) enter school below grade level. It is a constant race to catch up to expectations. Very bright kids can and do catch up with no extra intervention. Many others have the deck stacked against them. Poor attendance, lots of mobility, etc. These reasons and others prevent them from catching up. If you want these kids to reach their full potential, intervention needs to start in the home from the very beginning. I teach in a Title 1 school and we have a 3-year-old program. Students are assessed three times per year for receptive vocabulary. Native English speakers of all races typically enter the program with a receptive vocabulary of an 18-month-old. These students are typically developing.

So you're saying that the school's 3 year old program still doesn't help with getting these kids to grade level? (not being snarky, I'm really curious). I always thought that high quality daycare, like the kind white and Asian families choose, would be the answer.

Then if the answer isn't even daycare, it's parents and the family. It seems like there's two worlds- one where kids are fed healthy food and read to for 30 min a day and the other where they aren't. How can this be fixed? It's not a poverty thing either, I know plenty of poor families that care very much about their kids education. My best friend makes 35k at a non profit and her husband is a SAHD (both PhDs), they live in a 1 bedroom with their 3 kids and are happy as clams. Smartest kids you've ever seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
DP. Phasing them out would seem to be the logical extension of a march toward equity and a reduced emphasis on tests.

There is nothing logical about what you are proposing, which would be a race to the bottom. Our society is based on hard work and achievement, and we must offer difficult coursework to our students--ALL OF THEM-- to keep them competitive in a global economy.

If students of color need extra help succeeding in these courses, then that's what they should get.

Are Asian students included as students of color for these purposes and get extra help, or are we better off writing them off as losers for equity reasons?

I don't need to ask what you think about white students having trouble.