tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post4605317471747700157..comments2024-03-18T16:51:10.406-07:00Comments on Seattle Schools Community Forum: Wedgwood Spectrum - moving away from self-containedMelissa Westbrookhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17179994245880629080noreply@blogger.comBlogger162125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-66102255109937639912011-06-11T20:57:01.535-07:002011-06-11T20:57:01.535-07:00An Enrollment projections post by Charlie links to...An Enrollment projections post by Charlie links to the SPS report that has the data about which VR parent/s are inquiring (I think).<br /><br />Is it this? <a href="http://district.seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Departmental%20Content/enrollment%20planning/section%2010_Spectrum.pdf?sessionid=8bfd451bc2703055650fa027ad90c254" rel="nofollow"> Enrollment Trends for Spectrum</a> <br /><br />What I find very interesting in this report is that Spectrum consistently is showing upward growth (presumably indicating popularity and program sucess) and yet SPS is permitting alterations to the model that will essentially elimate it. Very frustrating.<br /><br />~katyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-42434097806707407542011-06-11T16:58:54.139-07:002011-06-11T16:58:54.139-07:00I guess I should also note that VR had been a thre...I guess I should also note that VR had been a three up for long time. My kids are older and I remember when there were also small class sizes. <br /><br />VR should be able to maintain self contained spectrum as a four up. However, that is only possible with the addition of portables (done) and the generic over crowding that is now synonymous with the NE. (done) <br /><br /> ne parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-71988671510789785282011-06-11T15:43:53.060-07:002011-06-11T15:43:53.060-07:00I don't doubt you either and since that type o...I don't doubt you either and since that type of data is no longer on the website, there is no longer a way to check. <br /><br />However, it is very reasonable that over the last few years as VR has really become a 4 up AND has filled with neighboring students AND already enrolled students get first shot at the spectrum seats AND there have been fewer new spectrum seats each year, that over time, the spectrum seats are filled by neighborhood students and there is simply no room for anyone else, so over time, there are fewer and fewer anyone elses. <br /><br />That is something that happens now that schools are over crowded by not historically. Historically, there was a lot more flow in and between schools. VR families would go to Bryant and vice versa. No more. <br /><br />As a 4 up, VR has a shot at maintaining a self contained spectrum. Lawton and WW are 3 ups and they have been dismantled. I imagine that there just isn't room for self contained Spectrum in 3 up schools any longer. <br /><br />- ne parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-52391363006671602442011-06-11T14:59:52.445-07:002011-06-11T14:59:52.445-07:00i'm not doubting you personally, but that data...i'm not doubting you personally, but that data doesn't seem right for the lower grades where my kids are. i don't see kids coming from say the bryant or laurelhurst area for just spectrum, unless they were already somewhat equidistant from the schools from the start. this is just anecdotal based on our class list addresses from the past few years. it would be interesting to see the make up of grades 1-3 at this point, i have a feeling it's a huge % neighborhood, including the spectrum kids.<br /><br />- VR parent (one of at least 2 posting under the same name!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-86127146257467682662011-06-11T14:30:07.476-07:002011-06-11T14:30:07.476-07:00On the old seattle school website, they used to ha...On the old seattle school website, they used to have maps of where the students came from. If you looked at the VR and WW maps, you could clearly see that more than 1/3 of the school was from out of the reference area. <br /><br />While there are plenty of VR area students that are spectrum qualified, two years ago, 1/3 of the school was not from the attendance area. <br /><br />- ne parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-69091749719517396072011-06-11T14:09:28.457-07:002011-06-11T14:09:28.457-07:00(not sure anyone else is left to read this so i ma...(not sure anyone else is left to read this so i may repost later elsewhere)<br /><br />i keep seeing mention of "watch those spectrum #s drop when clustering is implemented" or "WW doesn't have room to serve the needs of neighborhood kids plus spectrum kids"<br /><br />in the NE cluster, don't the majority of neighborhood spectrum (or even app) kids stay with their home school, regardless of programs they qualify for/school offers? i'd like to see a matrix of neighborhood/non vs spectrum/non applicants/wait list. i doubt clustering implementation will cause changes in numbers, the same kids will stay at WW (or VR, if it goes that route) b/c the parents are invested in their neighborhood schools, which just happen to have spectrum, for which their kids just happen to qualify. <br /><br />if these changes are implemented, i doubt we'll see much change in applicant numbers, neighborhood families will still apply, so their kids will be due whatever programs that designation entails, but it will be no vote of confidence for the actual program.<br /><br />it's like the teachers that get the kudos for having the class with the highest test scores - no it wasn't your going-though-the-motions teaching, it was the highly motivated kids and their parents that happened to be in your class this year. meanwhile the "teacher that is so great, she can handle these challenging kids" doesn't get the kudos w/out the scores.<br /><br />- VR parent (one of at least 2 posting under the same name!)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26892834260449456372011-06-10T17:52:23.956-07:002011-06-10T17:52:23.956-07:00Susan, we are coming from a private school, so we ...Susan, we are coming from a private school, so we don't have a previous public school to fall back on. Even if we were able to make a change to our school assignment a) our reference school has a waitlist b) we spent a lot of time already preparing our daughter for the transition to Wedgwood, so setting her up for a third school would be a big, big deal, and c) we still do not know exactly what the WW changes are going to be. Everything is still in a very high state of flux.<br /><br />Ironically, one of the reasons we enrolled her in private school was because we calculated she only had a poor to fair chance of getting into the neighborhood school in kindergarten, the last year of open choice. A neighbor kid was not able to get in the year before until a 5th K class was opened, something they were not going to do in our K year. Since we are so far away from all the other schools, we figured we essentially had no choice at all. We really do love her current private school, but it is getting more difficult to pay for it. So we have been working and thinking and researching and testing and filling out forms and touring since last September, and thought it was all settled, until a week ago. <br /><br />As a friend of mine said as we started down this path nine months ago - the only thing certain about SPS is change.<br /><br />So, I will continue to research this, and work with our new school community, and do the best we can with what we have. As I have said, we have every reason to think Wedgwood is an excellent school, even if this is not what we signed up for, and despite the district's last minute major change-ups.New To SPSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-3677165139953890222011-06-10T16:54:54.533-07:002011-06-10T16:54:54.533-07:00Oh that I could "manufacture" a WW stude...Oh that I could "manufacture" a WW student to be my kid! This gets curiouser and curiouser.<br /><br />The clustering expert Mr. Cronas is relying on specifically advises maintaining self-contained groups if you have the numbers to support them -- meaning the book and the method argue AGAINST, not FOR, the change.<br /><br />He admits that he is pushing it to deal with other "perceived issues."<br /><br />If they are truly going to teach, on a differentiated basis, to all kids in each class, it clearly makes for MORE teacher work (more tiers of performance to teach to), not less -- (unless, in a few cases, they really have no intent of teaching to any more levels; they just hope/assume their Spectrum kids will behave well, test well, and serve as good models for other kids -- and that no one will notice whether their individual progress suffers -- how would we ever know?)<br /><br />If I were a WW Spectrum parent (in ANY grade), I would request a meeting with Mr. Cronas, and ask him to bring Dr. Enfield and maybe a few board members (DeBell and KSB would be my choices here). I would tell them that this decision has a number of huge issues and needs to be reversed.<br /><br />First, the entire "clustering" model described in the book sounds highly experimental. To impose this on a program, without any input, buy-in, or notice, is objectionable. <br /><br />Second, even if this were a great plan, proven nation-wide, its use here is flatly contradicted by the author of the method (who advises keeping self-contained accelerated classes, if a school has enough kids to fill them). In addition, the books suggests a year of "lead-in planning, which clearly has not been done here. <br /><br />If Mr. Cronas tries to claim the year of pre-work HAS been done, then it means that this entire year, including during school tours and open enrollment, they have known that they were making a radical change to their Spectrum program, one they knew would be controversial (see Lawton), and yet they said nothing, they made no announcement prior to open enrollment, when parents could have used it in determining school choices? -- That would be flat out bad faith, or incompetence. (At this point, you might want to remind them about that "restoring trust and confidence with families thing). Frankly, this would be an "Ingraham-esque" situation, where the District would be claiming it had all this information on a major, major change, and couldn't be bothered to let families know before enrollment. <br /><br />I would insist that Mr. Cronas disclose what the "other issues" driving this decision are? Are they valid? Is this just his personal whim? Does he have a cranky teacher or two who think the whole thing is elitist and needs to stop (in which case, why did they apply for work at a Spectrum school -- there are plenty of others around). <br /><br />I would demand that this decision be reversed if the "other reasons" are sufficiently bogus. Otherwise, it should at a minimum be postponed at least a year to permit:<br /><br />a. The extensive preplanning process described by the book;<br />b. A carefully vetted process that describes how kids will be selected for each group, and how they get moved if the original selection criteria no longer apply;<br />c. What kind of data the school currently has that it can use to compare with future data (under the new plan) that shows the effect on achievement in both Spectrum and non-Spectrum kids. It should also evaluate whether the change results in fewer children applying to the WW Spectrum program, and whether the APP eligible kids from the neighborhood go to Lowell in increasing numbers.<br />d. Development of a joint parent-teacher committee to oversee implementation and evaluation and to determine whether, at some point, the "experiment" should end and the school should revert to the old self-contained model.Janhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09923777229601243321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-63506200627519158182011-06-10T15:42:41.216-07:002011-06-10T15:42:41.216-07:00Curious that Lawton has spectrum waitlist if they ...Curious that Lawton has spectrum waitlist if they are going to cluster grouping. It seems that by clustering you do away with the self limiting nature of self-contained classroom (i.e. Whittier). Wasn't that one of the positive benefits of this proposed clustering model? Lawton should be able to take more spectrum students which would be a great thing and no need for spectrum waitlist. Or does the district still limiting number of spectrum seats per school? <br /><br />Does anyone know?<br /><br />Curious parentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-61207285712093439262011-06-10T15:12:10.226-07:002011-06-10T15:12:10.226-07:00New to SPS,
My curiousity is killing me. Have yo...New to SPS,<br /><br />My curiousity is killing me. Have you called enrollment to see if you can switch to your neighborhood school? If so, and they said no, I'd raise a big fit given the bait and switch. If not, don't assume that you can't use this as a reason to get back into your neighborhood school.<br /><br />I agree with you, unless you are leaving the neighborhood school for self-contained, I don't see how WW will be any better than your neighborhood school. Even if it's as good or marginally better, that's not worth leaving the 'hood.<br /><br />SusanSusannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-65253054493439887542011-06-10T14:21:12.247-07:002011-06-10T14:21:12.247-07:00It is available at most schools. As an ALO model,...It is available at most schools. As an ALO model, which very many schools have ! Testing is pretty easy if you're in the SPS. You fill out a form and get your teacher to sign it, the tester calls and lets you know what day they'll be there. Your kid gets tested during the school day. Or so has been our experience. If you're coming from outside the SPS then it may be more complicated. Depending on where you score is whether you're APP, Spectrum or ALO designated. Kids can access ALO programs w/o being tested and via teacher recommendation.<br /><br />Chris Cronas needs to actually read the SCGM book. A huge point of cluster grouping is to reduce the range of differentiation by putting specific "groups" together. 1,3,4 can be together (so it's the top, average and below average, but not the far below average, b/c that range is to broad.) 2,3,4,5 can be together. 1's and 5's can't b/c that's too far a range for differentiation. So if he's saying he'll put Spectrum kids in all classes (whether equally divided or not) then he's not following the model and it'll be really hard 1. for teachers to reach that range of differentiation, 2. serve the advanced learners at all. FX, If you have 3 classes in 2nd grade and 20 Spectrum kids, two of those classes get 10 Spectrum kidsn each. The third class won't have any b/c you HAVE to keep 1's and 5's in different classes. <br /><br />Makes a whole new set of problems and doesn't address the social component one bit, which is what this really is about. (and capacity too) It's NOT about serving the needs of advanced learners.<br /><br />-cluster skepticAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-6701183620603722452011-06-10T12:24:58.523-07:002011-06-10T12:24:58.523-07:00Had we known this change was in the pipeline, we p...Had we known this change was in the pipeline, we probably would have chosen our neighborhood school over the Wedgwood Spectrum program. This is not because we dislike the community there - far from it. Everyone I've met so far, including Chris Cronas, has been wonderful and very inclusive and friendly. But many of the neighborhood kids go to our neighborhood school, and the social benefits of that cohesion are greater to us than the mild benefit of this new, untested ALO-style program being offered, which is just a slightly faster-paced math program. We already provide some of that at home with math tutoring.<br /><br />If I had the choice right now (which we don't of course, because open enrollment is closed), we would seriously consider switching this very minute. So yes, that motivation would work to decrease pressure on Wedgwood, but it would increase pressure on the other schools as well (which can probably handle it better than the smaller Wedgwood). Or just drive more families to private school, or to push even harder for admittance into APP.<br /><br />What I *still* do not understand is why advanced/compacted instruction is not available at every single school in this district, either through clustering for schools with small numbers of gifted/above average kids able to do the compacted work, or self-contained/blended classrooms for schools where there are enough kids to fill a class, and then some. Why so much gatekeeping and test taking and hoop jumping done at the district level? I just don't get why this is being done at the district, and not building, level, and why it is tied to a stringent, once-a-year cycle, and why so many obviously qualified kids are still being lock out.<br /><br />I can guess at the answers to this, but it is still the real problem that should be solved here.New To SPSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-53272492679270690162011-06-10T11:31:10.906-07:002011-06-10T11:31:10.906-07:00The simple truth here is that this change is for c...The simple truth here is that this change is for capacity reasons, not education reasons. <br /><br />Somebody just doesn't fit. WW is just not large enough for<br />neighborhood families<br />spectrum families<br />split siblings<br />spectrum siblings<br /><br />The building can't grown any more than it has - all the portables that can be permitted have already been added! <br /><br />So the only answer left is ... make it so that Spectrum families do not choose the school. <br /><br />north seattle momAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-87866870322024336962011-06-10T11:05:24.094-07:002011-06-10T11:05:24.094-07:00I have the Handbook, and you are correct. All the ...<i>I have the Handbook, and you are correct. All the comparisons are done to classrooms that previously had only 1 or 2 gifted kids. </i><br /><br />Bingo! So that point, and some quotes from the NAGC article need to be brought up in public at one of the next meetings. This is clearly a step backward <i>for the kids</i>. For all of them.<br /><br /><i>I think it is being used as a solution to other perceived issues. Chris Cronas said as much last night.</i><br /><br />This is appalling (although not entirely surprising). This point needs to be played up very strongly over the course of the next few days. Bottom line is that kids' needs are being pushed aside for other perceived parental and administrative issues. All the kids needs, since even the kids who are not high achievers benefit from self-contained Spectrum, since it reduces the differentiation load on the teachers. It's easy for teachers to <i>say</i> they want to see the gifted kids spread out, but when it comes down to effective differentiation, it's a HUGE amount of work to do properly, and the wider the range, the more work. Most teachers are well-meaning, but in practice it's nearly impossible to <i>effectively</i> teach to a wide range of abilities and achievement levels. They may try, but almost never succeed on all fronts. This is just common sense, but for those of us who are NOT new-to-sps, we've seen it in practice, and it's sad.<br /><br />Key points to make at the next meeting:<br />1) This is a step backward, even according to the authors of The Cluster Grouping Handbook<br />2) Negatively affecting (all) kids because of perceived adult "issues".<br />3) If you can get MAP/MSP boycott support in the building, specifically directed at this change, I think it would help. This will take some effort, probably on the phone/email to Spectrum families. You probably won't get as much support from the other families, even though this will be detrimental to them as well.<br /><br />And I'll copy this quote from the Cluster Grouping Handbook author here again because I think it's key to making sure Chris knows what he's doing flies in the face of best practice.<br /><br /><i>Keep in mind, however, if your school has enough gifted students for separate sections in which curriculum is accelerated, such sections should be maintained. </i>none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-30153269570984439952011-06-10T10:48:56.932-07:002011-06-10T10:48:56.932-07:00As we talk more with Chris Cronas, it's becomi...As we talk more with Chris Cronas, it's becoming clear that this decision is based on his experience working in inner city schools on the East Coast, and a passion to provide equity for all. Equity for all starts with the way this decision is rolled out to parents. The needs and concerns of Spectrum parents are not being considered, which doesn't feel like equity to me. <br /><br />Cronas' decision to dismantle Spectrum is clearly not guided by metrics or data, as evidenced by the fact that he has not done the work to collect any actual qualitative or quantitative data. He says that he'll make his final decision based on feedback, but he doesn't have a baseline established for measurement. He's basing this decision on his own personal alignment supplemented by ad hoc conversations with people that seek him out. That's not enough justification to destroy a program that is working for many people. <br /><br />Chris Cronas has a responsibility to all of the families at Wedgwood to establish qualitative and quantitative baseline metrics before the end of the school year. Here's one approach: <br /><br />1. Collect MAP test scores from all Spectrum and Non-Spectrum students to measure progress at the beginning and end of the school year.<br /><br />2. Conduct a school wide survey of all families to establish a baseline measurement of sentiment and satisfaction with the Spectrum program this year.<br /><br />Repeat this same survey at the same time next year, and repeat again the following year. After collecting these metrics and conducting a thoughtful analysis, he will then have enough data to make an objective decision. If there is a drop in test scores and sentiment with the kids currently in Spectrum, then the cluster solution is not meeting their needs. <br /><br />It is so frustrating to me that Chris Cronas making this decision without conducting any actual analysis. It is not professional and I am concerned about his leadership abilities if he doesn't understand this is part of driving effective change. I'm also concerned that SPS is allowing him to make these changes without measurement. Very concerning on many levels.Where's the rigor?noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-60009895351308976782011-06-10T09:57:36.177-07:002011-06-10T09:57:36.177-07:00I have the Handbook, and you are correct. All the ...I have the Handbook, and you are correct. All the comparisons are done to classrooms that previously had only 1 or 2 gifted kids. <br /><br />But I don't think the motivation behind these changes is to implement cluster grouping because it is a superior model to self-contained classrooms. I think it is being used as a solution to other perceived issues. Chris Cronas said as much last night.New To SPSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-90176694750078628912011-06-10T09:53:10.317-07:002011-06-10T09:53:10.317-07:00Someone should read through this this Susan Winebr...Someone should read through this this Susan Winebrenner article carefully, suss out the important stuff, and present it to Mr. Cronas and see what his reaction is. It flies in the face of what he's proposing.<br /><br />If it pulls him back a bit, then we'll know he's really considering the kids' needs. If not, then he's just made up his mind what he wants to do, no matter what.none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-56369887030024768112011-06-10T09:49:06.973-07:002011-06-10T09:49:06.973-07:00Until my previous comment gets undeleted, here is ...Until my previous comment gets undeleted, here is an important article for those of you who are justifiably unhappy with the (potential) loss of Spectrum at WW.<br /><br />http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=162<br /><br />This is an article written by the lead author of the Cluster Grouping Handbook, so it should hold some weight. Here's a very important quote:<br /><br /><i>Keep in mind, however, if your school has enough gifted students for separate sections in which curriculum is accelerated, such sections should be maintained. </i><br /><br />It appears to me, after reading through this article (but not the Handbook itself yet), that they are advocating for cluster grouping <i>as opposed to no grouping at all</i>. As a way to get <i>closer</i> to the optimum arrangement of self-contained gifted. Here's another quote that leads me to believe this:<br /><br /><i>The practice of cluster grouping allows educators to come much closer to providing better educational services for groups of students with similar exceptional learning needs. In non-cluster classrooms, teachers report they are able to pay more attention to the special learning needs of those for whom learning may be more difficult.</i><br /><br />Note: "much closer"none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-22796134939114350892011-06-10T03:45:12.538-07:002011-06-10T03:45:12.538-07:00Thanks SPS for your suggestion at the meeting on T...Thanks SPS for your suggestion at the meeting on Thursday and here regarding there being options for how the Spectrum class is divided. That is a place where Spectrum parents may be able to have some say. <br /><br />Some thoughts about the meeting:<br /><br />I’m glad SPS took notes on Robert Vaughan’s comments. He spoke extensively about the popularity of WW Spectrum and how there is always a wait list for this very popular program. I didn’t understand his point. There will not be a waitlist for the Spectrum program at WW when it is an advanced math program. Singing the popularity of program you advocate dismantling doesn’t make any sense to me. <br /><br />none1111 asked above whether WW would still be a Spectrum school. Clearly the honest answer is no. It will be a school in which Spectrum identified students are guaranteed advanced math curriculum. Otherwise, their experiences will be like all the other students. The teachers at WW already do extensive differentiated instruction. WW is and will be a great school. But it will not be a Spectrum school. If you love things as they are and have been (I do), then its disheartening.<br /><br />Many of the comments at the meeting Thursday regarded what metrics would be used to evaluate how the upcoming changes are affecting students. Of course this is a real quagmire. Maybe this is another place where parents could have some say. There was I think no mention of tracking what the new system will do for the Spectrum kids specifically. I’d like those numbers in the future. Even if they tell us almost nothing. And I’d like to know what it would take to motivate a return to the current system. <br /><br />Chris Cronas is a committed educator and speaks openly and honestly to the parent community. I appreciate that, I look forward to working with him for years to come, and I appreciate that he has a very tough job. On the Spectrum program point, we have different priorities. I know what the plan is. Now I want to know how parents can affect it. Thanks Charlie Mas for pointing out that there are some leverage points: e.g. opting out of MAP and MSP tests. That’s one possibility.<br /><br />I hope the intense love for WW and for its Spectrum program among the parents can be translated into a strong voice. We obviously won’t undo this decision. Maybe we can affect how it is implemented, since there are a lot of options about how to structure the student groupings. Hopefully we can do that respectfully and firmly. We need a Spectrum advocacy group. Robert Vaughan is not that, so far as I can tell.Dale Haileynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-91470938922176108452011-06-10T01:02:31.329-07:002011-06-10T01:02:31.329-07:00I need to go to bed, as my brain is fried, but yes...I need to go to bed, as my brain is fried, but yes, I agree the model being proposed is ALO. Robert Vaughan was at the meeting tonight, and I took notes on what was said, which I'll write up tomorrow. When asked specifically about district policy, he said something along the lines of: it was not a written policy but a tradition to have self-contained classrooms, so schools were able to change this without going through the district. <br /><br />I agree that the cluster grouping model presented does not match even what is in the workbook, and I spoke briefly to Chris Cronas about this. He seemed open to discussing this point further. <br />I suggested doing an even, two classroom split of district-identified Spectrum, rather than dividing among three classes. It may solve several problems at once - still retain enough cohesiveness and social support for the Spectrum kids, but allows flexibiliy for movement and opportunities for all students to access advanced materials, regardless of labels. I think most people are chafing the strongest at the idea of spreading the Spectum-identied kids out so thinly that they lose the social support network needed to "geek out" as necessary, for lack of a better, and more technical term.<br /><br />Again, it is late, I am very tired, and I'll post more on the Q&A session from Thursday. Lots of good questions from the parents.New To SPSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-67437365287279504152011-06-10T00:25:18.476-07:002011-06-10T00:25:18.476-07:00Argh! Melissa, blogger ate another post, could yo...Argh! Melissa, blogger ate another post, could you please undelete it? <br /><br />Anyone following this thread should back up a couple posts! In the meantime, here's a good article by the author of the Cluster Grouping Handbook that seems to contradict some of Chris's notions of cluster-grouping. My thoughts will hopefully be undeleted soon.<br /><br />http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=162none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-39576185696001087242011-06-10T00:19:25.918-07:002011-06-10T00:19:25.918-07:00WW mother said: Mr. Cronas was insistant that WW w...WW mother said: <i>Mr. Cronas was insistant that WW will still be a Spectrum school, just not self-contained. I think I can live with the new program, but if this is getting us closer to being an ALO school then count me out.</i><br /><br />His proposal is essentially ALO, by the district's own definitions. Read the definitions here:<br /><br /><a href="http://district.seattleschools.org/modules/cms/pages.phtml?pageid=230101" rel="nofollow">Advance Learning Programs</a><br /><br />ALO:<br />1) Provide a rigorous curriculum.<br />2) Accelerate reading and mathematics curriculum utilizing flexible grouping strategies.<br /><b><i>3) Provide differentiated instruction within heterogeneous, inclusive classroom settings.</i></b><br />4) Provide instruction by teachers familiar with the needs of advanced learners.<br /><br />Spectrum:<br />1) Provide a rigorous curriculum.<br />2) Provide an accelerated curriculum that focuses on student proficiency in grade level expectations and one grade level beyond or more in reading and mathematics<br /><b><i>3) Bring district-identified students together through self-contained or cluster-grouping strategies to form classroom rosters. </i></b><br />4) Provide instruction by teachers familiar with the needs of students who are academically gifted.<br /><br />Cluster-grouping, from what I'm piecing together on the fly, does NOT mean equally dividing the gifted kids among all the classes. It appears to be a solution that advocates for taking the handful of gifted kids you have and making sure you group them together when you don't have enough gifted kids to form self-contained classes. Here's another quote from the Susan Winebrenner article:<br /><br /><i>The practice of cluster grouping allows educators to come much closer to providing better educational services for groups of students with similar exceptional learning needs. In non-cluster classrooms, teachers report they are able to pay more attention to the special learning needs of those for whom learning may be more difficult. </i><br /><br />Note "much closer". But self-contained is even better, when possible!none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-50749980408938657832011-06-10T00:00:57.388-07:002011-06-10T00:00:57.388-07:00New to SPS,
Since you have the Cluster Grouping H...New to SPS,<br /><br />Since you have the Cluster Grouping Handbook, can you tell us how the information aligns with the info here? <br /><br /> http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=162<br /><br />This is an article on the NAGC site, written by <b>Susan Winebrenner</b> (the lead author of "the handbook") and Barbara Devlin. The entire page is worth reading, but here are a few quotes: <br /><br /><i>"There is an alarming trend in many places to eliminate gifted education programs in the mistaken belief that all students are best served in heterogeneous learning environments. "</i><br /><br />and<br /><br /><i>"When teachers try to meet the diverse learning needs of all students, it becomes extremely difficult to provide adequately for everyone. Often, the highest ability students are expected to "make it on their own." </i><br /><br />and<br /><br /><i>"When gifted students are placed in mixed-ability groups for cooperative learning, they frequently become tutors. Other students in these groups may rely on the gifted to do most of the work and may actually learn less than when the gifted students are not in their groups."</i><br /><br />but the best quote is this:<br /><br /><i><b>Keep in mind, however, if your school has enough gifted students for separate sections in which curriculum is accelerated, such sections should be maintained. </b></i><br /><br />THE AUTHOR OF THE CLUSTER GROUPING HANDBOOK SEEMS TO BE SAYING THAT CLUSTER-GROUPING IS WHAT YOU DO ONLY IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH GIFTED KIDS TO MAKE SELF-CONTAINED CLASSROOMS!<br /><br />Is it possible that people are misinterpreting the entire intent of the model?<br /><br />Is anyone still reading this thread? How did the 2nd (Thursday) meeting go?none1111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-26672539020437403662011-06-09T23:58:28.645-07:002011-06-09T23:58:28.645-07:00So much to think about.
New to SPS-thanks for a...So much to think about. <br /><br />New to SPS-thanks for all your research. I can tell you really care about your child. I was all on board with the new plan, but after thinking about it, I'm not so sure. Mr. Cronas was insistant that WW will still be a Spectrum school, just not self-contained. I think I can live with the new program, but if this is getting us closer to being an ALO school then count me out. I talked at length today with a teacher who will be one of the first grade teachers implementing the new program. I have no doubt she can do a great job of it, but she is a unique teacher for sure.<br /><br />WW motherAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28765366.post-31336404905134785392011-06-09T17:35:02.359-07:002011-06-09T17:35:02.359-07:00(continued)
Differentiated Instruction
The heart ...(continued)<br /><br />Differentiated Instruction<br />The heart of the model seems to be that this clustering allows teachers to deliver differentiated instruction based on the needs of each cluster, and at the same time also deliver compacted instruction for the gifted and above average groups (1's and 2's), and slower instruction for the below average and very below average groups (4's and 5's). However, I do not know precisely how this dovetails with district-mandated curriculum. Will the teachers have the ability to deviate from district-mandated lesson plans if the cluster needs it, according to this model? There is also a lack of discussion on how this would work with "walk to math", since it rearranges the classrooms clusters into one group. Presumably the 1's and 2's would be in the Spectrum math program, but according to this model, that is verboten. I want to understand this point better.<br /><br />Teacher Training<br />The model also assumes that every teacher has been trained in differentiated and compacted curriculum delivery. I fully admit that I have not read this chapter (chapter 7) in depth. And I fully trust that any teacher worth his/her salt can absolutely deliver on this. But the book does say that specific professional development is crucial to the success of the clustering model. I want to hear more about howe the teachers will be supported as this comes up to speed quickly next year. And more reading on my part is needed, so this is mainly presented as a topic that needs more exploring.<br /><br />Evauating the Program<br />Lots of information I have not gotten to yet in Chapter 8 on this topic, so I'll defer how the clustering model is evaluated once is has been introduced. One thing that jumped out, though, even in skimming this chapter, is the recommendation and timeline for a planning year. In fact, most of Chapter 2 is devoted to a timeline and details about a year long process of laying the groundwork within a school in year 1, before rolling it out in year 2. I know that Lawton has been doing this over the last year, so it is somewhat surprising that this planning year is NOT part of the rollout for Wedgwood. Maybe the work that Lawton has done will be leveraged at Wedgwood, but this was not specifically mentioned in last Monday's presentation. I plan on asking more about this tonight.<br /><br />Again, this is just my very preliminary impression from reading the intro and chapter 1 to the workbook in the last 24 hours. I fully expect many, many more details to be fleshed out over the coming weeks, and more discussions within the Wedgwood community. And I very much want to get my hands on the original research behind this model, and hear what the negatives are as well. Hopefully, this will give some of you out there a little information about the workbook that Chri Chronas is using as a guide, until it can make the rounds. And I'll post more about this once I get in a thorough read.New To SPSnoreply@blogger.com