What if the lie of Spectrum or ALO were challenged?
I don't know if this effort would be at all worthwhile, but I would really like to see someone try it.
Given the presumption and the suspicion that the advanced learning at most ALOs exists exclusively on paper, and that blended Spectrum is no different from an ALO, which is no different from nothing... has anyone ever tried to get their child's teacher or principal to provide evidence of an advanced learning opportunity?
What would happen - or, if someone has tried it, what has happened - when a parent or guardian demands evidence that a school is actually providing the advanced learning opportunity that the Board Policy 2190 and the Superintendent Procedure 2190SP requires?
The Policy says:
The Procedure says
By the way, do you notice how the Superintendent Procedure doesn't meet the policy's requirement that it describe the programs and services? There is no description of the services, is there?
So what would happen if a parent or guardian asked for the evidence of advanced learning opportunity? And, if the evidence were not there, if the parent or guardian escalated the complaint to the principal, the Executive Director of Schools, the district ombudsman, or wherever the current complaint process goes?
It is one thing for us to complain among ourselves about the absence of any advanced learning in the advanced learning programs. It's something else for people to complain to the bureaucracy about it. Stay civil, but stay resolute, follow the proper channels, and fill out your paperwork completely.
I honestly don't know what would result from this. At best, the teachers and schools would provide evidence of advanced learning. They would show that they are providing differentiation, accelerated content, and deeper learning opportunities. It would also be good if someone in authority - the principal, the Executive Director of Schools, or someone further up the food chain demanded that any absent elements be fulfilled. It's most likely, however, that we will discover that the policy and the procedure are meaningless and unenforceable. But let's get it a definitive and undeniable answer so we can demand a meaningful and enforceable policy and procedure.
What would happen - or, if someone has tried it, what has happened - when a parent or guardian demands evidence that a school is actually providing the advanced learning opportunity that the Board Policy 2190 and the Superintendent Procedure 2190SP requires?
The Policy says:
Advanced Learners
The District identifies and provides appropriate instructional programs and services for students who demonstrate high academic achievement, but who do not meet the definition of Highly Capable. Such students are identified as Advanced Learners.
Programs for Advanced Learners
Advanced Learning instructional programs will include differentiation, content acceleration, and deeper learning opportunities. Delivery mechanisms may include: differentiated instruction, groupings of Advanced Learning students to work together in subjects or on projects, self-contained classrooms, or accelerated pacing.
The Superintendent is authorized to develop procedures consistent with state guidelines regarding referral, evaluation, and identification of Highly Capable students in order to implement this policy. The procedures will describe the programs and services available to students identified as Highly Capable as well as to those identified as Advanced Learners.The language here is pretty plain. "Advanced Learning programs will include differentiation, content acceleration, and deeper learning opportunities" I don't think it is unreasonable to ask teachers or principals to show and explain how they are providing differentiation, content acceleration, and deeper learning opportunities. It is not unreasonable to ask for evidence of compliance with this policy.
The Procedure says
Spectrum is a program designed for students identified as "Advanced Learners," but Highly Capable students are welcome to join. Spectrum is for students who perform well above average for their grade level and may require more advanced work to remain engaged. Spectrum is offered at all middle schools and several elementary schools and classes are either self-contained or students are grouped within classrooms that have multiple Highly Capable and/or Advanced Learners, depending on location.
Advanced Learning Opportunities (ALOs) are individual school-based programs for students identified as needing more academic challenges. All students who are District-identified for Highly Capable Services or Spectrum, as well as teacher-identified students at ALO schools, may participate. These students are typically grouped within classrooms that have multiple Highly Capable and/or Advanced Learners to provide appropriate differentiation and acceleration.This means that the Spectrum students in an ALO or blended Spectrum program must be grouped together, somehow, within the classroom. Is that happening? If it isn't happening, then the school is out of compliance with the procedure.
By the way, do you notice how the Superintendent Procedure doesn't meet the policy's requirement that it describe the programs and services? There is no description of the services, is there?
So what would happen if a parent or guardian asked for the evidence of advanced learning opportunity? And, if the evidence were not there, if the parent or guardian escalated the complaint to the principal, the Executive Director of Schools, the district ombudsman, or wherever the current complaint process goes?
It is one thing for us to complain among ourselves about the absence of any advanced learning in the advanced learning programs. It's something else for people to complain to the bureaucracy about it. Stay civil, but stay resolute, follow the proper channels, and fill out your paperwork completely.
I honestly don't know what would result from this. At best, the teachers and schools would provide evidence of advanced learning. They would show that they are providing differentiation, accelerated content, and deeper learning opportunities. It would also be good if someone in authority - the principal, the Executive Director of Schools, or someone further up the food chain demanded that any absent elements be fulfilled. It's most likely, however, that we will discover that the policy and the procedure are meaningless and unenforceable. But let's get it a definitive and undeniable answer so we can demand a meaningful and enforceable policy and procedure.
Comments
I was under the impression that legally she is not "protected" or "guaranteed" anything and that the mere offering of a Spectrum classroom, despite it's inaccessibility, is sufficient to meet District policy. Is this correct? If there are more grounds to fight, I will gladly escalate.
I have challenged the teachers about their teaching practices with my daughter. When I point out the efficacy of acceleration over "enrichment" (an empty term these days) I usually get a black stare. When I push more, I finally get the concession "we're just given a curriculum to teach, we don't go beyond that."
It is not of any comfort that adults who simply do what they are told are the ones teaching my child.
On her reading assessment at the beginning of the year, my daughter got all of the hard questions right and a few of the easy ones wrong. The teacher interpreted these results to mean that she needed to be in a lower reading group because her comprehension wasn't high enough.
When I challenged this, questioning the interpretation of results, I got something similar, "I can only go by how many are right and wrong on the assessment." I received another blank stare when I pointed out that the research is quite clear that it does in fact make a difference WHICH questions are right/wrong.
Apparently, teachers are not happy when parents use research to challenge what they are doing. I am under the impression many teachers think using "data" was going to be a strategy impermeable to critique.
I think it is reasonable that if a teacher is going to use "data" to place my child in a reading group, then I should be able to question which data is being used and which data is blatantly ignored.
SW Mom
Answer: nothing
In our experience, the complaint is handled as instructional materials complaint, but since most teachers don't have or use district adopted materials, or they simply don't exist for many classes, there is little recourse.
-good luck
The attitude around education, from the classroom teacher up to the district leadership, seems to be only what is "legally required." Shouldn't the legal precedent be our starting point for reaching higher rather than our ending point? Why do we chase such low standards for our children?
I wonder if parents fighting, complaining, arguing, and escalating feeds into this notion of scarcity with not-enough-to-go-around. Why aren't rigorous academics widely available to all students who are interested?
Charlie, what would you recommend as the most effective hill for us parents to charge if we want increased academics for our children?
SW Mom
I am no educational expert, and I can speak only from my own personal experience, having been in the exact situation you describe. I don't claim for a second that my situation was in any way representative, because I'm sure it wasn't.
I didn't worry about it. Chances are that your daughter's teachers are so overburdened with unnecessary bureaucratic responsibilities that they could not help, even though they might be inclined to. I fed my daughter's interests with reading material and other materials that supplemented them. The result in her case was that she breezed through K-8, and as soon as she was out of 10th grade she was right into a full schedule of college work through Running Start, and never looked back. That was the true ALO.
-- Ivan Weiss
-good luck
Back around 2006, Maple Elementary taught all their students at a Spectrum rate/level. There was an article in the Times, extolling how this experiment had worked and students were mostly doing great.
But Maple had to rearrange dollars to do this and couldn't sustain it (and the district certainly wasn't going to help) and so they stopped.
A little unbelievable that something that parents liked (more rigor), that was tried (with good results) went away.
"I fed my daughter's interests with reading material and other materials that supplemented them."
I did this as well. Problem is, it's not your job. It's one thing for a sport or maybe a subject (like science or music) but not for basics.
And, what about parents without the time or wherewithal to do this?
I think what you could do if you get blank looks, is to work the chain of command. Ask your principal to show you the plan for meeting the needs of highly capable learners. (The principal should have something, if only on paper.) If he/she does, explain, without complaining, that this is not happening and it concerns you because your child has tested into Spectrum/HCC. If nothing, move on to the Ex Dir with an e-mail and cc it to your region's Board director. If nothing from Ex Dir, move on to Advanced Learning.
Document all of this because there needs to be a paper trail that parents are asking for services that the district says are available.
Legally SW Mom, as in State mandate means only those who SPS deems HC are required to get the services at any school they attend. (Which is 98% iq and 95/95% achievement at SPS and may be different in another district). The other programs seem based on capacity.
That said I would look to the HC parents to make a similar challenge to their kids MS. Seriously where is that program at? The district has placed at HIMS, JAMS and now WMS leaders who are antithetical to AL tracking and it shows in the current curriculum choices and pace/depth that they cover in their HCC classes - LA/SS.
-Do it
-good luck
I don't have a problem with this. I do have a problem that the challenge at JAMS is low. Students in gen ed middle school classes elsewhere are asked to tackle more. This has been discussed before on this blog. Parents are lulled into their HCC designation and don't bother to look at the classwork. Good luck stepping up to high school.
Disillusioned
DisAPPointed
We need evidence that HCC kids are being given more advanced material, or covering it at more rapid rate or in more depth, and being graded to higher level standards otherwise it is clearly not HCC it is just general ed, given a different name to appease parents.
Why has this district got such an aversion to providing rigor? Even at the HCC middle school sites the administration is either indifferent or biased against advanced learning. A teachers at JAMS told the HCC class that they didn't believe in the practice of separating advanced kids, didn't think HCC is needed = and this coming from one of the actual HCC class teachers. What kind of message is that to give a child? Even if a teacher has those beliefs they should not tell their students. And why are staff who are philosophically opposed to advanced learning given positions teaching advanced learners - its not good for the staff or the students they teach. But I guess it fits the district agenda.
Middle HCC
You can ask the district what the difference in curriculum is between Gen Ed and HCC, and I bet that you will hear that HCC classes go "deeper." This is perfect for the district because "deeper" cannot be measured (at least they won't bother), so the district doesn't have to do anything.
The district will not provide rigor because it is "unfair" and "inequitable."
We left for private after one year at HIMS and it is SO MUCH better.
-cried uncle
We are considering HCC for our daughter, but wonder if it is worth taking her out of the neighborhood elementary which she loves and where she does get to be challenged by things like "Walk To Math" and weekly reading book packets that are tailored to her current level. Does HCC these days provide much more than this?
Elementary Dad
"It's most likely, however, that we will discover that the policy and the procedure are meaningless and unenforceable. But let's get it a definitive and undeniable answer so we can demand a meaningful and enforceable policy and procedure."
Hey aren't we dealing with the same SPS administrative bureaucratic overlords that regularly skirt laws as well as policy and does whatever they choose?
Aren't we dealing with the same board that watches the above regularly?
Maybe an enforceable policy and procedure and a new board and a new superintendent and a new ........ etc. might possibly produce positive change.
We are far more likely to see a continued strong belief in "Differentiated Instruction" imposed on all to meet every student's needs in the regular classroom. The goal is apparently nearly equal outcomes for all.
The idea of a district responsibility to provide each child with the opportunity to maximize their learning .. is viewed as merely the irrelevant ramblings of elitist parents.
And so it came to pass that the intellectual decline continued under the banner of uniformity, Common Core and one-size fits-all. .... and mostly likely 6% raises for senior staff.
I suppose that Basis Charter schools in Arizona began with this type of frustration with the system.
Take a look at AZ charter NAEP performance. It is past time to abandon the equal outcomes differentiated instruction mantra in the SPS.
Remember there is even opposition to "walk to math"
As Rick Burke says: Its time to get back to learning.
-- Dan Dempsey
When neighbors ask my opinion about APP/HCC, I say middle school is the weakest part (at least in the north), and I wouldn't move my kid for that (we left the district after 6th because we found it so bad). You may have to move your child to HCC for 8th grade if you want her to go to Garfield (they can still go to Ingraham in 9th without being in APP in 8th). These are current "rules" and are subject to change at a whim and with no prior warning.
If your child likes her neighborhood school, and you feel she is being challenged, I would not move her. I don't know if you are north or south, but keep in mind that the north HCC elementary program is going through some major changes soon.
-cried uncle.
By HS, kids are doing AP or IB or courses at whatever level is appropriate for them so it's less of an issue ( maybe the concern is availablity of appropriate courses?).
It's really middle school HCC where it seems to fall apart - lot of inconsistency between 3 sites, variable committment to HCC (if not outright opposition) philosophically among adminstration/ staff at each site, no defined HCC courses/standards for most subjects. Math is OK because placement is according to performance and so tends to be at a more appropriate level. It is a real concern since Middle school is really where it all begins - getting a solid foundation for high school in important for most subjects as is developing good organization and study habits. It's not surprising that a large number of parents go private at this stage. If you have college-prep type courses, challenging courses in mind for high school I just do not see HCC middle school as providing a good stepping stone to this. It's just pathetic the way that SPS just prefers to cater to the lowest common denominator rather than exposing all students to more rigor and providing the support for them to be successful (a rising tide floats boats - a falling tide beaches them).
So what to do at middle school level HCC if you don't have the luxury of escape to private school? That is my big worry. I'd love for the HCC middle schools and curricula to improve but is that realistic given SPS? Would the kids get a better or just as good middle school education at our fairly well-regarded non HCC neighborhood middle school (but then they would lose elligibility so we're kind of stuck)
Middle HCC
-JAMS working
But the problem is - when they join the HCC/spectrum class are they ACTUALLY getting work that is harder or more advanced or graded more rigorously than in gen ed? Is there any evidence to show that it is? If not, then it's just rearranging bums on seats and nothing more.
I do wonder if the blended model (HCC/spectrum) is one thing that leads to the perception of lack of advanced material being provided - because kids who have been in HCC for some time might be ready for higher level stuff than those that have been in spectrum or just entering the class from gen ed - therefore if the material is aimed at the lower level, the longtime HCC students may be inadequately challenged. I don't know if this is the case but I would be interested to see if spectrum parents or gen ed parents who's kids get moved up into an advanced class are happier with what is provided than HCC parents? Perhaps this accounts for the discrepancy in opinions.
Middle HCC
Geez
Classroom teachers don't want to group bright students together to do accelerated work. They want to spread bright students around, to help their struggling peers as "role models" or literally to help them with the work. That is the "job" of bright kids in the classroom -- not to achieve their own potential. Teachers and principals know well that their career interests align with promoting equity and inclusion, and squashing ALOs.
The grip of PC is so strong in Seattle that no one wants to recognize the reality, let alone articulate it. But you will always stay puzzled if you don't recognize the reality.
DisAPPointed
AL
JAMS working
Our ES experience was pull out for math was the answer to spectrum. Until pull out became voluntary and some grades didn't do it because the teachers didn't want to as it was disruptive, caused class size to be lop sided, and lots of work to coordinate. We got differentiation which meant a different worksheet some weeks, but everybody was using the same math book. That means our child repeated a year in math. We asked the teacher and principal about this, but were told the kids were doing well in class and standardized testing and that because our ES has high numbers in state testings, this demonstrated things were good and the students were well prepared for MS. We had several teachers who frowned on supplementation and parents who did it just kept quiet about it. There were no differentiation for science or LAs. Reading was differentiated in that there were different reading groups which were student led. The problem with spectrum and ALO is it tends to be a small group within the school and that makes it hard to advocate and get traction. We didn't get any help from the AL department. Many parents were afraid to push too hard for fear of being stigmatized. Principal and teachers did what they want to anyway.
What we found. Kids with parents who have the time to teach and supplement will do well regardless of meaningful spectrum/ALO. Kids who don't, that's a tougher outcome to predict.
parent
You can't fight a tidal wave. If you are wondering why SPS would do this, I think part of it is to close the achievement gap by ensuring the high kids don't get too far ahead, and part of it is commitment to equity, which I understand, and trying to make sure everyone feels good about themselves.
If you address the problem head on you are forgetting where you live: Seattle, home of the passive aggressive. You will get nowhere, but will have identified yourself as one of "those parents".
You can prepare your kid for the road or prepare the road for your kid. I suggest the former, accept that this is the way it is, and do what you can for your kid.
BTDT
Has anyone brought this to the attention of the principal at JAMS, the executive director for the NE region, the advanced learning office or the school board?
Bums = butts = bottoms ie "butts on seats" = just rearranging students seating positions essentially.
Not bums as in vagrants if that is what you were thinking, And YOU were the one who thought that, not me.
Nothing to do with slumming it - if you read what I said you would see that I am in favor of any student who wants to do and has shown themselves to be capable of doing advanced work being able to access it. The problem is, it's unclear if any students are getting that.
But gosh, I wonder who you are that is so quick to go there.
Middle HCC
To me, that says, some children get more help and resources at home. Those children shouldn't learn anything at school. Equity demands that we stop educating children when they get ahead.
I really hope that isn't what you mean. But it sure sounds like it.
Equity should mean equal access to educational opportunities. It should not mean that everyone is equal. It definitely should not mean the children that are ahead should sit in a corner learning nothing until they are no longer ahead.
AL
In reality, the fact that few students who qualify to receive FRL also qualify as highly capable tells us that even highly intelligent children are not able to excel academically when their lives are affected by poverty.
AL also says It is likely that HCC programs contribute to further inequity by pooling advanced learning resources into special, separate schools.
The only advanced learning resources pooled in these schools are the students themselves and children are not resources to be distributed among schools in order to allow everyone to benefit from their presence.
According to AL, There is also something to be said about the benefit of peer mentoring, and the positive social aspect of this in classes of mixed learning abilities. Children can learn to work together to achieve group goals.
Peer mentoring and the positive social aspect of working in mixed learning ability groups do not meet the social and academic needs of highly capable children.
"Go back home" WTF??
I guess it never takes long before the personal attacks start when its an advanced learning thread.
Middle HCC was being quite constructive in expressing their views and certainly not denigrating group (except for district administration).
You just attacked them and didn't offer anything to the discussion. Why do you feel so threatened?
Students, through whatever combination of genetics or upbringing or socioeconomic status, aren't all the same: some are working at a higher grade level than others, while some are making it through their grade level material either comfortably or with some challenges, and yet others still are really struggling to cope with the grade level material. It is a fallacy that our teachers, in our current system can singlehandledly reach all of these groups in a single class and meet the needs of all of them adequately - so that they all do the best they can.
It might make some parents feel better if they thought the advanced ones were taken down a notch or two, but it's not actually going to help any students.
Typical AL thread
parent
SLR
Curriculum? Ha!
parent
AL, I wish we had adequate ALO opportunities for all kids in all schools. It's just not happening.
I had to smile at the "student helper" idea. As I told one teacher when my son was in elementary, he's not there to teach, he's there to learn. If one child is a "helper," then all kids get to be.
The divide at Washington won't stand for long. I predict 2 years tops. That will end the only decent middle school AL program. Even Washington has sunk in its rigor but it is something.
After Meany opens the differences in cohort makeup at Washington will be too stark for the district to tolerate and for politicians to allow. Sure, a self-contained cohort option will exist but my money's on it existing in dribs and drabs at various south and west schools, not in a lump sum at Washington.
Nothing has been said at the district level. This is simply a prediction. My money is on me to be right. SPS does not support advanced learning period except for Stephen Martin who is one person only.
Disillusioned
Does the group not familiarize themselves with policy?
Why familiarize yourself with a policy you have no intention of following? The district does what it likes, policy or no policy.
We know they will not be accountable regardless of what they do, so why do something you don't want to do?
-Sequim
What school is that ?!?! Every real estate agent wants to know, but please tell us first. Also, how does your principal survive?
-wondering about private
You clearly have not entered the teenage years or even close. My advise - and I sign off -
Chill
HP
Propublic
Pro-schools
And we are talking about preteens and teens, developing and growing and individuating people who are going to thrive or not in different environments. There is a lot we as parents cannot control as they become who they are going to be, for better or worse. But we can love them and support them on their journey, be it in public or private school.
Chill
Looking at private
Basically, if you control for demographics, public schools do better. In my personal circle lately public school kids of my demographic are doing better in the college application game than private school kids of that same demographic. The very, very wealthy do the best, of course, and they are mostly at private school. Probably random, but it's at least a data point for me when we start to think about high school.
But of course, these books- and especially my random anecdata- won't tell you if X specific private school is better than Y specific public school for Z specific child. Or what a geo split to unwillingly found a new school sophomore year of high school would do to a child's education, for example. Sigh.
-sleeper
WSDWG
To mix with 'those kids' may lend you the moral high ground and make you better for it in your mind. For me, 'those kids' are students like all others. They are not there as props nor to develop 'character' of your children. Our students have enough labels and burdens without the need for more adult hypocrisy and politics. Some days, I really want to yell "leave them alone."
parent
--South End
-- South End
Believe me, truer words never spoken.
And again, I always hear from parents who are slightly embarrassed to tell me they have one kid in public, one in private. Don't be. YOU know your kid and have to do what is best for THAT child.
And yes, private school parents pay taxes just like the rest of us.
Who has pushed past that level to speak to an Executive Director of Schools or the Ombudsman?
Who has made a formal compliant? Anyone?
The retaliation I received at the teacher/principal level was enough for me to back off and forgo advocating past that point.
The teacher and principal conveniently began escalating the discipline of my Spectrum-in-Gen-Ed student after I vocalized my concerns around the insufficiency of instruction for her.
I will be very curious to hear about others who made it further in the gauntlet.
SW Mom
But all of us are (or can be) advocates for public education and the future of Seattle Public Schools!
Jan
Point being, there is an ever increasing cohort in the SW. The blended classrooms were a necessity of enrollment unknowns in the first few years. As it becomes established, more and more full HCC classrooms will theoretically exist. In fact, I would venture to guess that Fairmount Park, while also designated a neighborhood school, will ever be able to accommodate the HCC families from just West Seattle alone. In year 2, it is already over capacity.
From what I hear, Breidenbach has done a wonderful job at FP and created a program that is attempting to address some of the criticisms of TM (lack of unity among whole school). Creating a new pathway in WS could potentially usher in an opportunity to learn from what is and is not working at current MS and HS HCC programs and start with a fresh approach. Will this happen? Not sure, but if the AL office and parents advocate for a robust program, I do not see why it can't happen. It just takes will (which SPS is historically absent of).
-public/private parent
Since you asked, I'd say for middle school and high school three classrooms per grade is necessary. There are nowhere near 75 HCC students of any grade in West Seattle and the number of highly capable students in West Seattle will not increase forever.
In the next few years, Madison will be over-filled with general education and Spectrum students and Washington will be under capacity. Creating an HCC program at Madison makes no sense to me.
If there's going to be a fresh approach to highly capable services in West Seattle, that should be clearly defined and when that has been done the West Seattle HCC should be allowed to give input on whether they are willing to give up a guaranteed self-contained cohort for it.
Future
The member of the senior staff with the longest seniority in JSCEE is Michael Tolley. He came in with Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and there is a steep drop in seniority after him. No one there remembers Madrona. No one there even knows about Madrona. If you tell them about Madrona they will tell you that "this time it's different".
If they don't know how it was, then how can they know that it is different?
I can't find where OSPI spells out out program/service delivery expectation and description anywhere. Anything like SPED laws which parents can pin down? Can you Charlie? Anyone?
it's not easy sticking your neck out either. Lots of people who were super smart like lawyers and UW professors and were happy to complain bitterly in private didn't do much and remained in good standing at the school. There are personal repercussions. We've faced them and we lost. It became a war of "don't you trust our teachers to do right?" Or parents who voiced concerns were told they were selfish and thought of only their children, that their child is not as bright as they hink and here are the reasons why, etc. When just asking questions and voicing concerns became a P-T conference of your child's ability, even a dimwit parent like me can read between the lines. I spoke to a FACMAC member for some guidance, but again, another dead end. I'm not sure if this was ever in FACMAC scope or at least that was the roundabout feedback I got.
parent
Advanced learning programs (Spectrum and ALOs) are voluntarily provided by the district and not required by OSPI. Board policy is the only thing you can look to for guidance.
This doesn't have to do with AL, but I have to thank many posters for sharing their (free and low cost) supplemental suggestions for math and other subjects. I've collected them into a list and gave them to friends and families. One friend in RB is sending her very mathy child to Aviation HS (the school wasn't clear with her and she didn't know by keeping her HCC child in the neighborhood school meant Garfield was off the table) and another is getting his MS child tested for dyslexia.
parent
Happy Halloween
Unfortunately, they have had some seriously negative experiences at SPS. If you guessed those were directly due to central district actions, you win the prize. There's where you see a huge difference between private and public -- no private school administration could get away with the kind of "talk to the hand" BS you get from SPS admin.
I do find it amusing that the vitriol oozing from some of these parents lurks behind the shadow of "Anonymous." These discussions are quite relevant given the current state of SPS, but throwing out personal attacks rather than engaging in educated discourse is petty at best, and cowardice at worst.
I attended a public HCC-type school out of state, was tracked all throughout K-12 and matriculated at an Ivy League college. The idea that a "rising tide raises all boats" -- namely, mixing HCC and Spectrum kids with the General Education population -- is at the heart of what our Founding Fathers (specifically Ben Franklin) established when they created public education within a republic. It makes practical sense, it IS the responsibility of all to set positive academic examples for peers, and it coalesces into an educated body politic. I gained far more insight from the very few General Education students who happened to attend my classes than from my "HCC" friends. I learned that it WAS, in fact, my responsibility to be an example for those not fortunate enough to have educated, upper middle class parents who valued a college education; that applying rigorous teaching techniques and methodology for all students, regardless of how well they did on a test, helped the entire community at large; and that isolating "HCC" students from their General Education peers breeds more inequality, more distrust within the larger community, and leads us all more towards an aristocracy than a meritocracy. And yes, I totally understand that some students simply are not up to intellectual par with others that are more capable academically for whatever reason(s), but completely isolating HCC students from their General Education peers, and demanding a separate and inherently unequal educational environment, segregates and exacerbates the problems we as a city face on a daily basis. This isn't "PC" politics -- it's common sense.
Thank you for your passionate and personal comment.
I don't think anyone is promoting rigid separation of students so that advanced learners never interact with general education students. I have not seen that advocated here or anywhere else, at least not seriously or with any popular support.
I do think, however, that people want their children to get lessons at the frontier of their knowledge and skills. I do think that many schools, while claiming to provide advanced learning services, do not really adequately provide it, or even, in some cases, provide any advanced learning at all. I don't think that Ben Franklin or the founding fathers had this sort of deception in mind.
If our schools can authentically provide advanced learning services in a general education classroom, as they claim and as some have claimed here, then they need to do it more reliably, they need to certify it, and they need to correct failures to do so. That simply is not happening.
I'm not asking anyone to give up an appropriate educational opportunity for their children - whether those children are working at, below, or beyond Standards. Please don't you ask that either.