Reply to Article on Maury/Miner merger proposal

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Article on Maury/Miner merger proposal "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]If they really wanted to try something like this, I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to start with two schools that are closer together in terms of at-risk population (DME’s stated concern) or test scores (correlated but obviously not the same).

People who bought within the Maury boundary paid a premium to do so because of the school. That’s not to say they are entitled to go there — boundaries change sometimes, etc — but just to say that these are people for whom going to a school with a certain cohort of on-grade level or advanced learners was important enough to pay a lot more money than they would have if they had bought a couple of blocks over. They are not going to “come quietly” if you are all of a sudden going to organize things in a way that will put their kids in classrooms that are now 50% below grade level.

If you start by evening out two schools closer together on those measures, you are likely to get less vociferous opposition, because the changes will be less dramatic, and in the process of doing it are likely to learn more about how to make this model both more effective academically and more attractive to families (important for retaining the more invested families/higher performing kids you are trying to spread around). [/quote]

Or if there was more trust that all kids are going to get the level of instruction they need, instead of pretending it is wrong to want your kid to get that. And of course the current fad for disregarding, you know, actual teaching and learning methods, is much worse for poor kids than rich kids. If instruction at Maury hadn’t been so haphazard already it might have been an easier ask. [/quote]

This for sure. Even now at Maury, several teachers have told me how difficult it is to effectively teach the range of children they are presented with in each class. Broadening the range — or weighting it further in one direction — would only make it that much harder to provide the needed education to each student there. If a school offers tracking, and you can be confident your kid will be taught content at their level with a cohort around the same level, you can fill the school however you want. [/quote]

But you kind of miss my point. The teaching methods are horrible now, no matter the track. all computers, no homework, no drilling, no tests to study for, no books, no consistently corrected papers. No independent research. It’s bad for our privileged kids and even worse for unprivileged kids. [/quote]

I don’t think the two are entirely unrelated. I don’t see how a teacher could even come close to properly teaching so many students of varying levels and abilities without an assist from computer programs, for example. [/quote]

I mean, Montessori schools do it all the time. Even if you don't want true Montessori, some of the principals can be applied to more traditional classrooms -- facilitate independent exploration of subject matter, offer instruction in small groups while other students work independently, encourage mastery through more experienced students explaining and demonstrating concepts for less experienced students.

The problem is not that kids are at varying levels and abilities. The problem is that some kids have serious behavioral issues that make what I just described not possible, and schools offer teachers little support in dealing with these kids. Screens are an easy way to placate kids who don't have baseline levels of behavior. Many of the kids who pose the biggest problems already have parents who rely heavily on screens as a behavioral management tool at home.

But it is ultimately short sighted. Excessive screens and insufficient time outside or engaged in physical activity will ultimately exacerbate behavioral problems for all students, even the ones who came in with some decent social and emotional skills. All screens do is distract and numb kids, so it can work in the short term but it means kids aren't really getting what they need. The screens also get in the way of deep focus and study, so it might help kids do better on assessments at the end of the school year (especially if administered via the same on-screen program as much of the curriculum) but they will retain less of the information than they would if they were getting more direct instruction, reading physical books, working with physical teaching tools, or just working with pencil and paper. And they also don't learn to deal with boredom or frustration, which will make it hard to impossible for them to go deeper into subjects as they get older.

The reliance on screens only makes sense in the moment, as a panic move to deal with a situation that has been set up to fail students and teachers alike. As a purposeful approach to curriculum, it doesn't really make sense.[/quote]

Teacher here, it’s not just the behavior issues - it’s also lack of parent accountability. If your child misses 20+ days of school what am I to do if the child never makes it up? You have kids missing 50,60,70 days of school or arriving at 11:30AM.

[/quote]

According to many posters here, it is racist for you to hold black students to account for missing school. Much like it is for giving scores earned on standardized tests.[/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