Reply to Wilson honors for all - how has it worked?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Wilson honors for all - how has it worked?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It sounds like an excellent model and a common sense, simple and effective approach to the a racial inequity that should not exist in the first place. I hope they continue it.[/quote]

So all common sense about creating tiered classes and really pushing the highest achievers doesn’t matter as long as each class is diverse.  I’m genuinely curious about parents who putt diversity over all other academic pursuits for their kids.[/quote]

The main issues with tiered classes is that pretty much every time they have been studied, it's been clearly shown that students aren't actually assigned to tiers based on ability, so the entire basis for this model is completely flawed from the start:

"The Second International Mathematics Study (SIMS) was a comprehensive survey of mathematics taught and learned around the world... For the SIMS study, 8th graders in all four tracks completed a pretest of pre-algebra arithmetic skills at the beginning of the year. Researchers examined the distribution of scores on the test by student and by math track. Although it was expected that class-type performance would be different, Kifer and colleagues' (1993) analysis of student and classroom performance found considerable score overlap among tracks.

[b]Only half of the students who achieved the top 10 scores on the pretest and one-third of the students in the top 25 had actually been placed in the algebra-level classes.[/b] Inequities existed on the other end of the proficiency spectrum as well: [b]Nearly 50 percent of the students assigned to remedial classes had scores that were better than 25 percent of the students in general math.[/b] In addition, Kifer and colleagues found that [b]5 of the 23 remedial classes had higher mean scores than 75 percent of the students in general math, 50 percent of the students in pre-algebra, and 25 percent of the students in algebra.[/b]"

https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P7342.html

These results have been replicated repeatedly -- over and over and over in school district after school district.

Some other issues:
1. The research shows that tiered classes are largely ineffective and increasing student learning.

2. The quality of teaching is lower in lower-track classes. Less experienced teachers tend to teach them, fewer resources are devoted to them and teachers are less engaged.

Here's an abstract of one of the first articles to systematically make these points:  https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P7342.html.

Basically. like a lot of "common sense", tiered classrooms totally fail to stand up to rigorous scrutiny.

[/quote]
You misrepresent the research. And your link is to a paper from 1987, which is now over thirty years old. An honest assessment of the research is that it shows that non-tracked programs hurt the lowest and highest performing students. This is not a surprise to anyone who has attended a school or taught at one.:)

And very few high schools in the nation have such a large distribution of students who perform at the very low end and the very high end. Wilson High School in this sense is truly unique. And so it is much more important for Wilson--relative to other more homogeneous high schools--to recognize that students have vastly different needs that require tailored instruction (e.g., on-level vs true honors classes). To intentionally not tailor instruction to a child's needs at a school such as Wilson is unethical.

The best study done on this topic was done by the “Chicago Consortium for School Research" (CCSR) which is part of the University of Chicago. Their 2010 study is titled "College Prep for All? What We’ve Learned from Chicago’s Efforts". Looking at a 10-year period, CCSR measured the impact of the City of Chicago’s implementation of a program in 1997 that was similar to Wilson High School’s “Honors for All”.  Chicago ended remedial class for English, math, science, and social studies which meant that all students were now enrolled in college prep classes (thus the tag "college prep for all"). It was no surprise that CCSR found “there were no positive effects on student achievement” and that students at the low-end and high-end were both negatively impacted.

[b]CCSR study[/b] - https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/college-prep-all-what-weve-learned-chicagos-efforts 
[b]CCSR Press Release regarding study titled "Chicago’s college-prep-for-all policy failed to improve student achievement"[/b] - https://consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/press-releases/211PressReleaseCollegePrep.pdf

Here is CCSR’s description of the study:

[i]To examine the consequences of the new curriculum on students’ outcomes, the research teams compare outcomes for students in Chicago before and after policy implementation in three subject areas: English, math, and science. In the study described in this brief, the focus is on two mandatory ninth grade courses: Algebra I and English I. This focus was selected because ninth grade coursework often serves as a “gatekeeper” in many schools for more advanced study, and remedial coursework was common in Chicago prior to 1997 in both subjects. Under the new policy, students were required to take Algebra I and English I in the ninth grade (or a higher course in the math or English sequence, such as geometry, Algebra II, or English II)….[/i]

In CCSR’s words, here is a partial summary of their research results:
[b]
[i]There Were No Positive Effects on Student Achievement [/i][/b]

[i]One of the key premises of mandatory curriculum policies is that greater equity in course-taking will lead to improvements in student learning (as measured by tests and grades) and college readiness (as measured by test score gains and increases in advanced course-taking). While students were considerably more likely to earn English I and Algebra I credits by the end of ninth grade, the researchers found no evidence of these kinds of broader impacts on academic outcomes as a result of the new curriculum policy. Specifically, test scores in math and English were unaffected by the increase in college-preparatory coursework in the ninth grade. Furthermore, grades declined in both subjects for lower-skill students, and these students were significantly more likely to fail their ninth grade English or math course. Absenteeism also significantly increased among students with stronger skills in both subjects…

Test scores in math and English did not improve for either low- or high-skill students, and reading test scores actually declined for the highest- skilled students; ninth grade math and reading grades declined for low-skill students; failure rates in both subjects increased for low-skill students[/i]
[b]
[i]The New Mandatory Curriculum had Negative Effects on Graduation Rates and College Enrollment 
[/i][/b]
[i]Another key argument for mandatory curricula is that these coursework reforms will help students get to college and complete their degrees. Yet the researchers found evidence to the contrary in Chicago Public Schools...
[/i]
[b][i]Implications for State and Federal Policy
[/i][/b]
[i]These findings have important implications for policymakers looking to enhance access to college-preparatory classes and implement a mandatory curriculum or other course-taking requirements in states or districts. While the Chicago Public Schools 1997 reform did reduce inequities in coursework by entering skill level, race and ethnicity, and special education status, the policy had no effects on the major outcomes these kinds of curricular reforms are designed to impact. Test scores did not rise among ninth-graders, students were no more likely to take advanced math classes beyond Algebra II, and they were no more likely to attend college. Moreover, the policy change produced a number of adverse consequences: math grades declined, math failures increased, absenteeism rose among average- and higher-skilled students, and graduation and college-going rates declined. [/i]

[i]The Chicago experience should serve as a cautionary tale for those who advocate for similar mandatory curriculum policies in their cities and states. [/i]

When Wilson HS quickly implemented "Honors For All", Principal Martin and the Wilson Diversity Committee never mentioned the Chicago study to parents or students despite its obvious relevance. I would like to know why.

On the Kojo Nnamdi show last week, Principal Martin said that she was surprised that the school did not get much negative push back from parents to the implementation of "Honors for All" and she attributed the lack of pushback in part to an FAQ produced by the Diversity Committee. That FAQ did not mention the Chicago study and also was misleading/factually incorrect which helps explain the lack of pushback. It is time to re-evaluate Honors for All and to do that Wilson needs to be transparent with data that would allow students and parents to measure the impact of the program.

[/quote]

So now we have people presenting competing studies. I would like/have to see a meta study on this. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics