Anonymous wrote:The change in ratings was Youngkin’s way of putting down public schools. It was a rotten thing to do. It’s not based on how individuals do in schools, but how many different types of students are in each school. Using words like “Distinguished” verses “on track” only based on how privileged to students are when they walk through the door is meant to give false impressions. Well, mission accomplished, Glenn, and good riddance.

I think if you speak with people working in these schools (I am one) you would find that many of them agree with the assessment

The change in ratings was Youngkin’s way of putting down public schools. It was a rotten thing to do. It’s not based on how individuals do in schools, but how many different types of students are in each school. Using words like “Distinguished” verses “on track” only based on how privileged to students are when they walk through the door is meant to give false impressions. Well, mission accomplished, Glenn, and good riddance.

Anonymous wrote:So, Long Branch is the result of prolonged Duran-led policies?

Of course not. Duran hasn’t even been here that long. And he’s much better than the one before.

I was a teacher at a failing NYC public middle school that did a turnaround once put on a list (which came with extra resources, of which I was a part of).

We turned it around by (1) differentiated lessons within the same classroom for each lesson (3 levels - under, middle, and above) and (2) each subject/classroom had 2 teachers - one focused on the middle / above kids and one focused on the below kids (me).

We also really leaned into the “growth mindset” teaching approach via Carol Dweck and incorporated some of China’s teaching methods (they teach to mistakes which sounds crazy but google it, it works - I’m a BIG believer in it).

Within a year we exceeded all NYC AND NY state achievement benchmarks based on standardized test scores. These kids were cooking academically.

So all that said - if we’re serious about turning this problem around, it’s not hard, but the county has to want to put in the work. 99% of my students were super poor like wear the same outfit to school every day poor (we ended up giving them school polos to help) and something like 25% had IEPs so that’s not an excuse either.

Anonymous wrote:So, Long Branch is the result of prolonged Duran-led policies?

No, it’s a widespread systemic problem in American schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m too tired to do this now, but I hope someone will explain subgroup size, the subgroup reporting requirements, and how that skews the data in — if I may say so — stupid systems like this.

Someone? Anyone?

It is based on federal designation. Basically, they look at the scores of the 5th percentile of Title 1 schools in the state, and then look at designated demographic subgroups. If any subgroup has scores that are worse than this 5th percentile threshold across all of math, reading, and science (if applicable, not all groups have science scores), then they get designated as a Targeted Support and Improvement school and they are docked a level on the accountability rating.

Yes, but there’s a reporting threshold for group size. It used to be 30, which I believe is still in effect.
So your lower-SES school which exceeds the minimum group size in every category? Every subgroup gets reported. A N.A. school with fewer than 30 kids in, say, the 5th grade low-income science test score group? Not reported, thereby artificially raising the scores.

They lowered the threshold to 15, so this is less of an issue now.

So, Long Branch is the result of prolonged Duran-led policies?

And parents in the community are OK with this? Is this a Duran thing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at another school that is on the list and IMO it’s justified. I am neither a fan or huge critic of Duran though I feel he is partially responsible for some of what is happening. When I talk to friends across the county they have similar concerns. The way we are educating special education students and ELs is not supportive in many cases. At the same time there have been huge cultural shifts in parenting that are impacting achievement.

THIS. This is the problem, and there’s nothing Duran can do to fix it.

Fix it entirely? No. But there is a huge amount schools can do to boost performance and outcomes.

Like WHAT? Seriously, what — specifically — would you do?

Better, content-rich curriculum.
Phonics-based reading.
Teaching facts and knowledge rather than nebulous skills.
More days in school.
Fewer screens, more textbooks.
Smaller classes in some cases.
More differentiation.
Don’t pass on kids that need to repeat.
Schedules that provide routine that make kids feel secure.
Deal with and eventually separate out discipline cases.

Or you can just throw in the towel on achievement, like Jonathan Chait talks about here: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/12/school-reform-progressives/685179/?gift=rGeOi84Cw86O5rDyk0k6nh1ypn4wQDUwI8-VeiN1kyg&fbclid=IwdGRjcAOqMqlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe1XUEPi21nipkFi3vEY1fW_ZqBGzT1cECCwbAJGeijqqTA7Tsud4XXmc2qGU_aem_mkd5L1BfI3YuOJqVmhPTeQ

None of this works unless you’re willing to separate kids by ability, and that is never going to happen.

Why will this never happen? I've heard that schools don't do this or no longer do this. I was surprised to hear this. In the name of inclusion or concern that the students will figure out who are the "smart" kids, and feelings will get hurt? Is this really the latest trend?

I say this with love, OP: you are very out of the loop or misinformed. This is very much current practice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m too tired to do this now, but I hope someone will explain subgroup size, the subgroup reporting requirements, and how that skews the data in — if I may say so — stupid systems like this.

Someone? Anyone?

It is based on federal designation. Basically, they look at the scores of the 5th percentile of Title 1 schools in the state, and then look at designated demographic subgroups. If any subgroup has scores that are worse than this 5th percentile threshold across all of math, reading, and science (if applicable, not all groups have science scores), then they get designated as a Targeted Support and Improvement school and they are docked a level on the accountability rating.

Yes, but there’s a reporting threshold for group size. It used to be 30, which I believe is still in effect.
So your lower-SES school which exceeds the minimum group size in every category? Every subgroup gets reported. A N.A. school with fewer than 30 kids in, say, the 5th grade low-income science test score group? Not reported, thereby artificially raising the scores.

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny (and very telling) how quickly the conversation of “what can be done to improve school performance and scores” shifted to “the only important thing is differentiation (for my kid)” in the last two pages.

I don’t see anyone arguing for differentiation for just their child. It doesn’t serve struggling students to place them in classes they’re not ready for. No amount of “supports” will make up for the fact they should be in a lower level class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at another school that is on the list and IMO it’s justified. I am neither a fan or huge critic of Duran though I feel he is partially responsible for some of what is happening. When I talk to friends across the county they have similar concerns. The way we are educating special education students and ELs is not supportive in many cases. At the same time there have been huge cultural shifts in parenting that are impacting achievement.

THIS. This is the problem, and there’s nothing Duran can do to fix it.

Fix it entirely? No. But there is a huge amount schools can do to boost performance and outcomes.

Like WHAT? Seriously, what — specifically — would you do?

Better, content-rich curriculum.
Phonics-based reading.
Teaching facts and knowledge rather than nebulous skills.
More days in school.
Fewer screens, more textbooks.
Smaller classes in some cases.
More differentiation.
Don’t pass on kids that need to repeat.
Schedules that provide routine that make kids feel secure.
Deal with and eventually separate out discipline cases.

Or you can just throw in the towel on achievement, like Jonathan Chait talks about here: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/12/school-reform-progressives/685179/?gift=rGeOi84Cw86O5rDyk0k6nh1ypn4wQDUwI8-VeiN1kyg&fbclid=IwdGRjcAOqMqlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe1XUEPi21nipkFi3vEY1fW_ZqBGzT1cECCwbAJGeijqqTA7Tsud4XXmc2qGU_aem_mkd5L1BfI3YuOJqVmhPTeQ

None of this works unless you’re willing to separate kids by ability, and that is never going to happen.

Why will this never happen? I've heard that schools don't do this or no longer do this. I was surprised to hear this. In the name of inclusion or concern that the students will figure out who are the "smart" kids, and feelings will get hurt? Is this really the latest trend?

Because it looks like segregation by race and income level.

Should we base education policy decisions on what they look like? If the impact of differentiation is more targeted and focused teaching, isn't that better than what they're currently doing? If we really are letting the optics of this drive our decision, then there's really nothing more to say about this. We've failed everyone, and most importantly, we fail the ones who need it the most.

That’s my point. They’ll never do anything to address this, and there’s no point arguing.

It’s funny (and very telling) how quickly the conversation of “what can be done to improve school performance and scores” shifted to “the only important thing is differentiation (for my kid)” in the last two pages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We knew this would happen when Youngkin’s board of ed proposed the new standards a year or so ago. They knew then how many and which schools would be labeled “off track” and “needs intensive support.” They’re new labels applied to the same test scores that used to be considered okay. It’s all part of the relentless attack on public schools to argue for vouchers and a two-tiered system.

I'm a Democrat but the Republicans were not in charge when APS closed for a ridiculously long time during COVID, which did more to undermine public schools than anything Youngkin did.

and here we go. The "open up nooow" APE parents are the same people pushing for higher standards but their true goal is to show public ed is failing so they can get their vouchers for privates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I work at another school that is on the list and IMO it’s justified. I am neither a fan or huge critic of Duran though I feel he is partially responsible for some of what is happening. When I talk to friends across the county they have similar concerns. The way we are educating special education students and ELs is not supportive in many cases. At the same time there have been huge cultural shifts in parenting that are impacting achievement.

THIS. This is the problem, and there’s nothing Duran can do to fix it.

Fix it entirely? No. But there is a huge amount schools can do to boost performance and outcomes.

Like WHAT? Seriously, what — specifically — would you do?

Better, content-rich curriculum.
Phonics-based reading.
Teaching facts and knowledge rather than nebulous skills.
More days in school.
Fewer screens, more textbooks.
Smaller classes in some cases.
More differentiation.
Don’t pass on kids that need to repeat.
Schedules that provide routine that make kids feel secure.
Deal with and eventually separate out discipline cases.

Or you can just throw in the towel on achievement, like Jonathan Chait talks about here: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2025/12/school-reform-progressives/685179/?gift=rGeOi84Cw86O5rDyk0k6nh1ypn4wQDUwI8-VeiN1kyg&fbclid=IwdGRjcAOqMqlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZAo2NjI4NTY4Mzc5AAEe1XUEPi21nipkFi3vEY1fW_ZqBGzT1cECCwbAJGeijqqTA7Tsud4XXmc2qGU_aem_mkd5L1BfI3YuOJqVmhPTeQ

None of this works unless you’re willing to separate kids by ability, and that is never going to happen.

Why will this never happen? I've heard that schools don't do this or no longer do this. I was surprised to hear this. In the name of inclusion or concern that the students will figure out who are the "smart" kids, and feelings will get hurt? Is this really the latest trend?

Because it looks like segregation by race and income level.

It’s crazy how much testing and data collection we do now and we don’t use it for ability grouping. The reality is that parent never want to see their kids in the lesser group and will fight it, this has been a problem in middle school intensified classes.