Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘differentiation’

Really, what’s up with those people in Kansas?  There they go again, pushing some crazy-ass notion, out of step with the nation…  Except, um, maybe this time they’re onto something.

GT listservs are humming with the news that Kansas City, Missouri schools are experimenting with the elimination of grade levels, following on the heels of the schools in Colorado and Alaska.  Here’s the Kansas story as it appeared in EdWeek the other day.

Forget Grade Levels, Kansas City, Mo., Schools Try Something New

…Students—often of varying ages—work at their own pace, meeting with teachers to decide what part of the curriculum to tackle. Teachers still instruct students as a group if it’s needed, but often students are working individually or in small groups on projects that are tailored to their skill level.

For instance, in a classroom learning about currency, one group could draw pictures of pennies and nickels. A student who has mastered that skill might use pretend money to practice making change.

Students who progress quickly can finish high school material early and move forward with college coursework. Alternatively, in some districts, high-schoolers who need extra time can stick around for another year.  Advocates say the approach cuts down on discipline problems because advanced students aren’t bored and struggling students aren’t frustrated….

Now the “drawing pictures of pennies” gives me pause, but I’m guessing (hoping) this is a lower elementary lesson, a simple example the reporter latched onto to make a point.  Further into the article it quotes a student who “used to get bored after plowing through his assignments. He had to bring books from home or the library if he wanted a challenge because the ones at his old school were one or two grade levels too easy.”  His parents moved him into the district specifically for the experimental approach, and are thrilled:  “I wish school was like this when I was growing up,” said the dad.

So yes, that cry of “Hallelujah!” you’re hearing across the nation at this news is from parents of GT kids, frustrated beyond belief by the arbitrary barriers posed by lockstep age/grade-based education.  You know, the “but what will we do if we run out of curriculum?”

Could the Kansas experiment ever happen in Montgomery County?  Let’s just say I’m not holding my breath.  Note that these initiatives are happening in school systems described as “bedraggled” and “low performing” with “abysmal test scores.”  That alone could make the idea a non-starter here in Lake Wobegone, where we’re an urban school district only when it suits our purposes.  Or, one could expect the PR jujitsu approach favored by the good Dr. Weast, wherein–wait for it–it’s touted that MCPS is already doing this!  “We have blah, blah, blah number of X graders taking Y grade math–in elementary school! Blah, blah, blah number of X graders taking Y grade math–in middle school!  Highest number of AP tests in the nation…”  Well, you get the point.

But that’s not to say that this approach isn’t needed.  The current GT screening and articulation process, and the piloted SIPPI process both operate under the official notion that “students may accelerate learning and participate in advanced-level course work at their local schools.” (This from the MCPS Strategic Plan, Our Call to Action).  Sounds lovely, but eyeballing sample screen shots of the Course Placement and Articulation data screens shows that in cases where a grade level of acceleration is recommended (and the school and MCPS recommendations always jibe) the only areas where acceleration can take place are math and reading, with the recommended intervention/remedy for reading being William and Mary.  Local GT advocates remain unconvinced that there is a “continuum of services” available at local schools, rather that–as one advocate waggishly put it–MCPS’s identification and articulation process is “a bridge to nowhere.”  If there is acceleration available, it is only within strictly drawn parameters.  As the Singam case and others show, it takes extraordinary pressure, or a principal willing to buck the system (equally extraordinary) to accommodate the more-numerous-than-one-would-suspect outlier kids who need more than in-grade William and Mary or one or two years of math.  And let’s remember that the whole idea of what constitutes “grade level” is suspect, with MCPS itself having admitted that that a child performing just fine at grade level would not be prepared to meet it’s vaunted 7 Keys to College readiness.

I would love to see MCPS embrace true experimentation of the kind happening in Kansas, Colorado and Alaska.  Charter school anyone?  Oh, never mind.

Read Full Post »

The other day Husband Dear pointed out a blogging milestone that slipped my notice:  sometime in the past month I exceeded 200,000 page views.  Thanks to everyone who’s stopped by and who continues to read my musings.

A milestone which most certainly did NOT escape attention took place this morning:  For the very last time, I drove C. to school.  Her last day ever as an MCPS student.  Hard to believe this MCPS chapter, such a huge part of our life for the past 10 years, has drawn to a close.  Seems like just yesterday that I stood with her on the playground as she lined up with her class for her very first day of first grade.  I didn’t have to drive her, and normally I don’t, but hey, it was her last exam and she needed the extra half hour of sleep.  Besides, she’s leaving in three months–I have to spend some time with my baby while I can!

So was C. the least bit wistful?  Um, no.  Not a bit. She attended the drama picnic a week ago and will miss her drama friends, but has no interest in attending her classwide picnic tomorrow afternoon.  Didn’t want to buy the yearbook.  Laughed how all of a sudden people who never talked to her were posting to her Facebook wall about how her leaving is a “betrayal” of the ol’ alma mater.  Nope, no looking back.

It’s a nice half hour drive to her school, so I asked, what were her reflections on this, her last day in MCPS?  What would she do differently, what should have been done differently?  Because one could argue, hey, it didn’t really turn out too badly.  You’re in the best school in the county (Newsweek says so!), and you’re leaving to go to one of the best boarding schools in the country.  Can you really complain?

Her answer, unequivocally, was that she should have been allowed to grade skip.  Really?  I pressed her.  Really, she insisted.  Socially, she has always gravitated to kids a grade, and more often several, ahead of her.  The teachers she looked back on most positively were the ones who understood, and gave her more challenging material beyond what was offered to everyone else.  The second grade teacher who gave her unlimited access to the library.  The third grade teacher who let her read different books from the rest of the class. Aha!  So doesn’t that just prove that MCPS does differentiate and that it works?  Alas, those teachers were, according to her, the grand exceptions.  The counter example would be offering to “reward” a verbally gifted kid with math acceleration and sitting in heterogeneous classes where all the other kids loath you because you “know everything” (being called “The Walking Dictionary” comes to mind) and you resenting them for being so painfully slow.  So much for having bright students serve as “role models” in the class.

I told her that it had recently been suggested that we could/should have pursued a legal remedy back in her middle school days.  Part of me so wanted to, however I also knew that legally gifted isn’t like special education. And really, when you are in the midst of the crisis, stressed beyond belief, does it really make sense to launch a lawsuit?  How is going to make the immediate situation at hand better?  Which sadly means that the system continues along, unchallenged.

I’ve suggested that she document her experiences and maybe even share them with members of the school board. Heck, ask to meet with Jerry Weast and Jay Mathews.  It’s what her friend up in the Boston area is doing.  Only he’s actually been invited by a member of the school committee to speak to them about the needs of “high-end learners.”  When’s the last time AEI ever asked students what they think of gifted education in MCPS?  Oh, that would be never.

Read Full Post »

And so the school year is ending with a whimper.  On Tuesday the Board of Education will vote on the the FY2011 Operating Budget, working from proposed budget cuts put forth by the Superintendent.  Chances are very good that Board will accept them.  Here’s what’s very likely ahead:

  • Class Size Increase -  1 additional student per class over last year’s class size. Consequences include combination classes (where two grade levels are combined) in elementary schools for math and reading.  Middle School and High School will see fewer course offerings due to the cut in staff.
  • Academic Intervention Teachers – Reduced by 24. Total staffing will be 110 for FY2011.
  • Special Program Teachers – Reduced by 12.9 (Specific staffing cuts at College Gardens ES, Sherwood ES, Piney Branch ES, Einstein HS, Poolesville HS, Wheaton HS, Thomas Edison are all mentioned in the memo. In addition, the 5 International Baccalaureate Middle School Years Programme schools will have their coordinators reduced from a FT position.)
  • Secondary School Counselors – Reduced by 6
  • Focus Teachers – Reduced by 9
  • Reading Initiative Teachers – Reduced by 8
  • Reading Teachers – Reduced by 5
  • ES Paraeducators – Reduced by 27
  • Staff Development Teachers – Reduced by 10.4

The allocation of many of these positions will be determined by the Community Superintendents. Schools apply for these positions by submitting a comprehensive plan and the Community Superintendents decide where these resources can best be utilized for maximum impact. Submissions showing excellent staff AND community support are viewed favorably.

  • Media Assistants – Reduced by 5.5 This impacts 11 elementary schools.
  • Maintenance Positions – Reduced by 6. Yep, increases the current backlog of repair orders.
  • Textbooks and Instructional Materials – 30 percent cut.
  • Elementary Class I Stipends and Activity Buses – Results in no extracurricular programs except for Chorus, SGA, and Safety Patrol (and PTA-sponsored programs such as Hands-On-Science and FLES).

At the middle school level, arguably the weakest link in MCPS and the one where the lack of gifted options in the home middle school is particularly acute, given the move toward heterogeneous “Advanced for All” classes in science and social studies. Here are some details:

  • Special Program Teachers – $830,038.  (Page 7) The reductions in middle schools include a 1.0 position decrease (a .2 position for each of the five schools) in International Baccalaureate Middle Years Programme (IBMYP) staffing and a .6 position decrease in immersion staffing (a .2 position for each of the three schools). FY 2011 is the fourth consecutive year of special program reductions at the middle school level. The five IBMYP schools will have their coordinators reduced from a full-time position to teaching one class a day. IBMYP coordinators will have less time to coordinate the unique courses for the program and less time to coordinate the personal projects each IBMYP student must complete. This reduction makes it more difficult for schools to reach the goals of the International Baccalaureate Organization.
  • Middle School Reform – $1,716,701.  (Page 10) The elimination of $1,292,031 in stipend funding for Middle School Reform cohort collaborative work will limit the time classroom teachers and paraeducators have to work together to design, implement, and evaluate effective instruction.  Work after school, on weekends and other non-duty days, or hiring of substitutes to complete tasks, will be limited. This type of work is challenging to complete in a single class period. Cohort collaborative work has been greatly valued by instructional staff and provides cohorts the time to create rigorous lesson plans and assessments that are challenging and engaging to students; determine re-teaching strategies for students who did not master the objectives in cohorts; examine student work and analyze individual student, class, and course data to determine students‚ mastery, identify trends in performance, and inform instructional planning; and identify and integrate a number of strategies to support differentiation and equitable practices in order to meet the range of student learning needs.

The latter is particularly worrisome for GT students.  MCPS’s mantra has long been “trust us, we differentiate.”  And for years frustrated parents have sworn up and down that it’s not happening.  On occasion they’ve been able to wrest a rare moment of candor from MCPS officials, an admission that yes, implementation of differentiation is indeed spotty; it’s a high level teaching skill and they’re trying to do the training to get there.  Well, that thread of hope seems to be breaking and what we will see in middle schools is “advanced” science and social studies classes with the entire wide spectrum of student abilities and teachers who are not receiving the requisite training and preparation time.

Still under the gun:  The Visual Arts Center.  So glad that the Post is finally giving this program cut some coverage. Kudos to parent advocate Sue Katz Miller and others who have worked tirelessly to stop the halving of this program, which will save MCPS a measily, paltry $65,000.  In a multi-billion dollar budget, this cut is just shameful.

[To keep up with some of the egregious examples of MCPS waste, keep an eye on the Parents' Coalition Blog].

Read Full Post »

Last week I thought I had really put my foot in it with a friend.  She has an extremely bright and creative 3rd grader and I realized that the deadline (Monday, November 9) for the Centers for the Highly Gifted was fast approaching .  So I gave her a call and in the course of the conversation sort of wove in, “So…are you going to apply?”  When she said “No, I don’t know what I would put on the form” I just about had a heart attack.  Reflecting on my reaction, I worried I had seriously overstepped.

But then late yesterday afternoon she sent me an email.  Could I come over that evening to talk about the application?  She and her husband were stumbling on the first question:  “What advanced learning need has your child demonstrated that you believe MAY NOT BE EASILY MET IN HIS OR HER LOCAL SCHOOL PROGRAMS.”   Sure, I wrote her.  She emailed back; another friend was  also going to come over.  By the time I arrived, there was yet another friend there for soup and chat.  (My friend is like that.)  Little did I know that I was going to be the evening’s “featured speaker.”

However it turned out really well.  We had a good, thoughtful discussion about giftededness, MCPS, the Centers, their home school, education.  For my part, it was very informative to hear their concerns about both home school and Center program, and to get their impressions of the MCPS presentations they had sat through.  And they told me they appreciated my perspective and the chance to actually talk this stuff through, because the focus had been so much on the process of applying.

So what were my main points?

  • My starting point for all of this is that the Center might not be great for every GT kid, but at minimum a parent shouldn’t cut off the opportunity by not even applying.  If your child gets in, you can always say no.  If they attend but don’t like it, they can always go back to their neighborhood school.
  • There was some concern that kids in a GT program would get an “attitude,” that they would feel superior to other kids.  My response?  Kids in a regular classroom who are always at the top, who always finish their work before others, are getting no favors.  Contrary to what one might think, condescension (not to mention behavior problems) can actually breed in that situation.  Whereas when you put gifted kids with other kids at their readiness level, they may realize for the first time that they aren’t the best, that there are others smarter than them.  Learning to work and even struggle a bit is a good thing, as opposed to coasting through, never learning work habits and then having the consequences hit them later in life when the lesson is harder and it really matters.
  • Bottom line: Every child has a right to learn something during the six hours they are required to be in school.  They shouldn’t be used as tutors or “good influences” for other kids to their own detriment.
  • Diversity.  Yes, this has been a concern with GT programs in the county–that the Centers and Magnets are overwhelming White and Asian.  Encouragingly, my friend and her friends reported that the parents who showed up at the Center information meetings were extremely diverse.  Which brought me to my next point….
  • I think I planted some seeds of an “aha” moment when I explained that principals have an incentive NOT to have GT kids leave the building, especially minority kids.  Think about it.  Under No Child Left Behind schools live and die by their test scores.  Why would a school encourage a high achieving child–especially a minority child–to leave?  I mentioned it because….
  • I had heard through the grapevine that parents at this particular school had gotten the hard sell from their principal, that “whatever the Center can do, we can do  better.”   Sorry.  Just. Don’t. Buy. It.  In my humble opinion, the “GT” that could be offered would be the thin gruel of a smidge of William and Mary and math acceleration.  End of story.  Whereas at the Centers, students receive substantive writing and writing instruction; use of WordlyWise vocabulary books; creative, content-rich interdisciplinary science and social studies; truly differentiated and appropriately challenging reading instruction.  And of course grouping with peers, and the stimulation and understanding that comes with that, and teachers who understand more about giftedness than the average teacher.  Slam dunk.

Read Full Post »

I’m pleased to direct you to a story that appears this week in our little bitty local freebie newspaper, The Takoma Voice.  But the story is anything but little bitty.

Sue Katz Miller, one very involved Takoma Park parent and most excellent writer, devotes her School Scene column to a question and answer with Denise Jones, a former NAACP Parents Council Representative.  Ms. Jones removed her daughter from MCPS, enrolled her in private school–and in this frank conversation talks gifted education in MCPS and why she ultimately decided to leave.  Do read it.  Trust me, it’s a must-read.

Hers is a rarely heard story.  But we here in the Red Zone, Down County part of Montgomery County know it’s not unusual.  Just last week I was getting on the Metro and ran into an African-American mom I know. She’s an environmental policy person; her husband is fluent in Russian and does foreign policy work.  We got to know a each other a few years ago while waiting in line to vote, and as it turned out she was a friend of a friend.  Our paths continued to cross, and whenever they did, talk inevitably turned to our kids, our elementary school and gifted education…or the lack thereof.  I remember one very deep conversation at a Christmas party and how frustrated she was.  Well, that morning on the Metro she told me that both of her kids are now attending a local private school.

Two more bright African-American students with well-educated, involved parents–gone.

The ones who leave and homeschool. The ones who go private.  Nope.  Not even on MCPS’s radar screen.  MCPS has no way of hearing, and more importantly no interest in hearing, why these families choose to leave.  If MCPS truly wishes to improve, to be a “learning community,” then it might start by listening to those who have said, “No, thanks.”

Read Full Post »

As part of the AEI (Accelerated and Enriched Instruction) team presentation to the Board of Education on September 8, Kay Williams screened a video ostensibly demonstrating differentiated instruction.  Which elicited this response from a parent:

I am going to LOSE my mind.  The differentiation video (http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/development/resources/Differentiation%20Principles/player.html) is the SAME video I saw in an MCPS / MCCPTA Gifted Child Committee presentation of Differentiated Instruction about 2 years.  This particular video is of a Title I Kindergarten classroom, consisting of THIRTEEN children.  Yes, 13!  Not the @ 22 in my school!

And the second video I saw as part of that presentation was of a homogeneous GT English class.  Following a presentation for middle school reform that, in writing, recommended heterogeneous class structures.

Ah… the devil in the details.

Indeed.

Read Full Post »

Interesting article over on our local freebie paper, The Gazette today.  Do read it.

County’s middle school curriculum too accelerated, some parents saySchool system wants 80 percent of pupils ready for college

As the Montgomery County school system continues to discuss how to get more students ready for college and the workforce, some county parents say that administrators are pushing too many middle school children into advanced classes before they are ready….

Ever on message for the “Seven to Keys to College Readiness,” Superintendent Jerry Weast is quoted:

“Our goal is to get … 80 percent of our students to be college-ready by 2014,” schools Superintendent Jerry D. Weast said at the time. “It’s an ambitious, but very reachable, goal as long as our students know the pathway that it will take to get there.”….

And the pushback:

But the pace could be too fast, said Dina Yagodich, an adjunct math professor at Montgomery College’s Germantown campus with three children in county schools. While she is not against acceleration, some students can’t handle the advanced pace, she said.

Her pre-algebra classes at the college are “filled” with students who graduated from the school system, she noted….

Yagodich, referencing state data, pointed out that just 73 percent of the county’s eighth-graders scored proficient or advanced on last year’s Maryland School Assessments in mathematics, while 26.8 percent scored basic, the lowest level.

“I am concerned for the push to get 80 percent of students a full grade level ahead when 26.8 percent of them aren’t even at the eighth-grade level,” Yagodich said. “The push for acceleration has concerned me, and although it is good for many students, I worry that many students are pushed beyond their abilities and are never able to catch back up.”

Also weighing in, teachers’ union president Doug Prouty who says teachers don’t have time to “go back and re-teach struggling students.”  Ted Willard (MCCPTA and AEI Advisory Committee representative) says students should have a “choice of working through classes at a slower pace…..We shouldn’t push for things before they’re ready.”

What they’re saying, in a nutshell, is that students’ abilities vary.  That one size does not fit all.  That just because someone at 450 Hungerford Drive says all students will meet certain advanced standards doesn’t make it so.  To paraphrase the good Dr. Weast (with a nod to Fred S.), these folks are “willing to put ability on the table.”

Unspoken in the article is what this says about grouping.  Because remember, MCPS has been eliminating GT classes at the middle school in favor of heterogenously grouped classes.  MCPS officials argue that they can offer the same accelerated, rigorous classes to all students by providing “support” and “scaffolding” to struggling students.  What people in this story are saying–and what parents have known for, like, forever–is that fishes are not wishes.  As things are structured now, it’s not working.  It doesn’t work for struggling students, and it’s doing no favors to the students who are ARE comfortable with the rigor and acceleration being offered–and could do even more if given the attention.

Is it a problem with the standards?  Is it a problem with the currriculum that leads up to middle school?  Is it a problem with how elementary students are being taught?  Whatever it is, something is fundementally broken in MCPS–and all the glitzy PR in the world isn’t going to be able to reconcile the ambitious (for some) goals with the reality of varying student ability at given points in time.

Read Full Post »

In the days of appointment TV

Today is the start of what should be an interesting three weeks.  Well, interesting for me at least.  This afternoon C. starts an official MCPS online course that satisfies a Maryland state graduation requirement.  I’ll be curious to see how the class is structured and what the interface is like.  The entire experience of it.  The course goes for three weeks, three hours a day (they say; hopefully less), bookended by two mandatory four-hour, in-person classes.  A semester’s worth of work.  Done.  Out of her schedule so she has room for more interesting things down the line.  Less cool is that we’re paying ($310) for the privilege, despite it being a mandated course.  Sigh.

Nonetheless, I am increasingly thinking this is the way to go–or at least one option that needs serious attention.  I am getting so tired of bogus online discussions about how to meet the needs of gifted kids–or more accurately why we can’t.  I’m tired of hearing how my kids (and kids like them) have to diffuse the pool of underachieveing students so as to improve the overall discipline of a school (this was actually argued on a gifted listserv over the weekend.).  I am tired of hearing how it isn’t cost effective (let alone “fair”) to meet their legitimate learning needs via grouping because “it’s just a few kids” yet people continue to  insist that there is something magic about arbitrarily grouping kids from the same birth year and zip code.

How about this?  Set them free! Teach a child what he or she is ready to learn.   Once they’ve learned it, let them progress to the next thing.  If they finish “early” so be it.  Let them go into the world to learn, to volunteer, to apprentice, to further studies at the college level, regardless of their age.

And psssst.  (Sotto voce) Welcome to the 21st Century.  There is this thing called the interwebs.  It is the opposite of appointment learning.  It uses things like VOIP and IM and blogs and webcams and “webinar” technology.  It allows people to connect whether they’re across town from each other or across the globe, to collaborate in real time–or not.  Problem is, if MCPS were to consider this, they’d spend a few years considering it, then a few more years piloting it to just a few schools, then issue a study, and then (maybe) consider it to be a viable means of meeting the needs of accelerated learners–but by then you and everyone who has kids in the school system would be long gone.

As it happens, online learning is in the news this morning.  A group of all-girls school, including local Holton-Arms, is piloting the Online School for Girls

For now, the online collaboration will allow the four participating schools — Holton-Arms, Harpeth Hall in Nashville, Westover School in Middlebury, Conn., and Laurel School in Shaker Heights, Ohio — to offer classes that would not have generated enough student interest or teacher support in any one school. When the classes open to the public a year later, the educators hope that students around the world — including homeschoolers and girls at coed schools — will be able to take part in a version of the girls’ school experience. And they want to prove that single-sex online education works. They can’t find anyone who has done anything similar.

I don’t really have an opinion about the all-girls aspect, but the fact that this is being done by “hoity-toity” private schools is encouraging.  Maybe if MC”we’re the best”PS sees it being done they’ll consider it too.  Because if it’s a choice between an online class and my kid sitting in a real class being bored out of her mind (or disrupted by classmates who have no interest in learning), I’ll choose online learning any day.

P.S.  Check out what online courses MCPS currently offers.  The array of AP’s is quite impressive actually.  But why can’t kids take them during the school day?  Is it because then they couldn’t charge $700? Would they allow a profoundly gifted kid to give an AP class a go in middle school?  And of course there is the array of courses offered by CTY, EPGY and others that have been around for ever.  Has anyone ever heard of MCPS allowing a child to take one in lieu of MCPS classes?  Readers, what are the online options in your state or district, and how do they mesh with brick and mortar school?

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.