Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. If there is not more to this story then what was printed in the WP (and that’s a Big If) then it shouldn’t be taboo to say/think that the school was designed at the outset to be a place for very hard working and/or advanced kids, in a race/class/sex neutral way. Why tip-toe around?
I think it's because that's pretty much the basis of the whole charter debate - instead of investing resources into neighborhood schools in order to bring these types of specialized programs to those schools, is it better to pull the resources out and just create specialized schools? When you put the resources into neighborhood schools, there's the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats; when you pull resources out and create specialized schools, it can seem like a quick fix that will help the few who are able to gain access to the school, but ultimately won't help create a stronger school system.
I put in the hours at our local school to make it work. We were successful because we had people either with money or the ability to do fundraisers for large sums of numbers. First off, a parent shouldn't have to work this hard to make a school successful. Of course parents should be involved but to the level that is required in some DC neighborhoods no.
The system is so broke and that's why charters are so important here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP here. If there is not more to this story then what was printed in the WP (and that’s a Big If) then it shouldn’t be taboo to say/think that the school was designed at the outset to be a place for very hard working and/or advanced kids, in a race/class/sex neutral way. Why tip-toe around?
I think it's because that's pretty much the basis of the whole charter debate - instead of investing resources into neighborhood schools in order to bring these types of specialized programs to those schools, is it better to pull the resources out and just create specialized schools? When you put the resources into neighborhood schools, there's the idea that a rising tide lifts all boats; when you pull resources out and create specialized schools, it can seem like a quick fix that will help the few who are able to gain access to the school, but ultimately won't help create a stronger school system.
Anonymous wrote:Isn't the reality of issue that we don't want to face the extrmeme effects of income inequality. Sure you may not feel rich in ward 3 with your $800,000 colonial but you are still more well off than most of the country. The reality is your educational attainment will be passed down to your child. If you you are poor your deficits will also be passed down. In my mind the real problem is that we treat too much of education as a set of skills so income inequality magnifies the problem. I have thought we needed more content for a long time but this editorial does a better job a framing the changes than I can articulate.
Vocabulary Declines, With Unspeakable Results
For all the talk about income inequality in the United States, there is too little recognition of education's role in the problem. Yet it is no coincidence that, as economist John Bishop has shown, the middle class's economic woes followed a decline in 12th-grade verbal scores, which fell sharply between 1962 and 1980—and, as the latest news confirms, have remained flat ever since.
The federal government reported this month that students' vocabulary scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress have seen no significant change since 2009. On average, students don't know the words they need to flourish as learners, earners or citizens.
All verbal tests are, at bottom, vocabulary tests. To predict competence most accurately, the U.S. military's Armed Forces Qualification Test gives twice as much weight to verbal scores as to math scores, and researchers such as Christopher Winship and Anders D. Korneman have shown that these verbally weighted scores are good predictors of income level. Math is an important index to general competence, but on average words are twice as important.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444165804578010394278688454.html?mod=ITP_opinion_0
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:.
It is called differentiation, and anyone in the field of education gets inundated by this concept course after course regardless of the teaching method.
The sad thing however is that it is not being used, or is being used minimally by many teachers.
The same complex concept can be taught to the very advanced and below grade student in the same classroom if the teacher can create different test formats to accommodate all students. This way everyone ( including ESL, learning disabled) is served.
Not too difficult to do. It's just more time consuming but gives every student an equitable chance to grow and succeed.
Differentiation is a joke!! The bottom line is that when advanced learners are mixed with struggling learners, the teacher has no choice but to focus on the struggling learners.
It is absolutely not a joke.
I have seen it done at the elementary, middle and even high school level in selective schools.
This is something consistently done in US schools overseas, where diplomatic and business communities are served. Teachers may not face the exact same challenges as in public schools but they have so many other ones.
At the elementary level, small group instruction is being used consistently
At the middle and high schoo level, lessons are prepared and written in a simpler format (think abridged version of a complicated book).
Let's say it's history or social studies at the middle or high school level. Those students who are struggling with the language will have teacher-made simpler reading which does not sacrifice context.
Same happens with some of the homework and some of the testing.
The word "differentiation" itself is seldom used but expected to be fully implemented.
Is it time consuming? You bet! However, once the teacher has the material, it is just a matter of implementing it. Instead of spending hundreds of hours on meetings and empty staff development, have the school concentrate on differentitation in the classroom and equity will definitely follow.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe DC does not offer advanced, gifted, honors b/c more than 1/2 of it's three graders cannot read at grade level same for all their other grades. Kind of looks bad to offer advanced instruction for high SES kids (white, Asian, black) when the majority of the kids (FARMS, AA) cannot read.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:.
It is called differentiation, and anyone in the field of education gets inundated by this concept course after course regardless of the teaching method.
The sad thing however is that it is not being used, or is being used minimally by many teachers.
The same complex concept can be taught to the very advanced and below grade student in the same classroom if the teacher can create different test formats to accommodate all students. This way everyone ( including ESL, learning disabled) is served.
Not too difficult to do. It's just more time consuming but gives every student an equitable chance to grow and succeed.
Differentiation is a joke!! The bottom line is that when advanced learners are mixed with struggling learners, the teacher has no choice but to focus on the struggling learners.
It is absolutely not a joke.
I have seen it done at the elementary, middle and even high school level in selective schools.
This is something consistently done in US schools overseas, where diplomatic and business communities are served. Teachers may not face the exact same challenges as in public schools but they have so many other ones.
At the elementary level, small group instruction is being used consistently
At the middle and high schoo level, lessons are prepared and written in a simpler format (think abridged version of a complicated book).
Let's say it's history or social studies at the middle or high school level. Those students who are struggling with the language will have teacher-made simpler reading which does not sacrifice context.
Same happens with some of the homework and some of the testing.
The word "differentiation" itself is seldom used but expected to be fully implemented.
Is it time consuming? You bet! However, once the teacher has the material, it is just a matter of implementing it. Instead of spending hundreds of hours on meetings and empty staff development, have the school concentrate on differentitation in the classroom and equity will definitely follow.
Anonymous wrote:
It is absolutely not a joke.
I have seen it done at the elementary, middle and even high school level in selective schools.
This is something consistently done in US schools overseas, where diplomatic and business communities are served. Teachers may not face the exact same challenges as in public schools but they have so many other ones.
At the elementary level, small group instruction is being used consistently
At the middle and high schoo level, lessons are prepared and written in a simpler format (think abridged version of a complicated book).
Let's say it's history or social studies at the middle or high school level. Those students who are struggling with the language will have teacher-made simpler reading which does not sacrifice context.
Same happens with some of the homework and some of the testing.
The word "differentiation" itself is seldom used but expected to be fully implemented.
Is it time consuming? You bet! However, once the teacher has the material, it is just a matter of implementing it. Instead of spending hundreds of hours on meetings and empty staff development, have the school concentrate on differentitation in the classroom and equity will definitely follow.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Whoa, whoa - no one was suggesting a "large conspiracy." I was suggesting why some people dislike charters; maybe not you, but some people. But to give a more practical example, some people might say, "Why open a school like Basis instead of creating more honors and advanced classes in neighborhood schools?" That's not a "large conspiracy" it's a practical school/curriculum question.
And, I'd rather not get into it, but we all know why Ward 3 schools are more successful than other schools and why there's been no charters; that is a different discussion - likely a discussion about income, poverty, and out-of-school experiences, not a discussion about whether charter schools are the best thing for a school system.
DCPS is free to offer more honors and advanced course but chooses not too even though DCPS has more money to spend than any other district in the country!!! Heck, DCPS does not even acknowledge the need for gifted education as other states at least give lip service to the same need.
That may be, but some other states have Gifted IEPs to specifically meet the needs of gifted children and DC does not do this last I checked.
A Gifted IEP affords the student an individualized plan to meet their needs for gifted education and has great weight legally in ensuring that schools meet these needs.
That's just not true - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-schools-insider/post/dcps-to-pilot-gifted-and-talented-program/2012/02/06/gIQAZvpFuQ_blog.html
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:.
It is called differentiation, and anyone in the field of education gets inundated by this concept course after course regardless of the teaching method.
The sad thing however is that it is not being used, or is being used minimally by many teachers.
The same complex concept can be taught to the very advanced and below grade student in the same classroom if the teacher can create different test formats to accommodate all students. This way everyone ( including ESL, learning disabled) is served.
Not too difficult to do. It's just more time consuming but gives every student an equitable chance to grow and succeed.
Differentiation is a joke!! The bottom line is that when advanced learners are mixed with struggling learners, the teacher has no choice but to focus on the struggling learners.
Anonymous wrote:Maybe DC does not offer advanced, gifted, honors b/c more than 1/2 of it's three graders cannot read at grade level same for all their other grades. Kind of looks bad to offer advanced instruction for high SES kids (white, Asian, black) when the majority of the kids (FARMS, AA) cannot read.
I believe many school districts are guilty of educational malpractice!!! Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
That's just not true - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-schools-insider/post/dcps-to-pilot-gifted-and-talented-program/2012/02/06/gIQAZvpFuQ_blog.html
Anonymous wrote:
That's just not true - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dc-schools-insider/post/dcps-to-pilot-gifted-and-talented-program/2012/02/06/gIQAZvpFuQ_blog.html