20 thoughts on “KEEP DIVERSITY IN THE CLASSROOM”

1. I want to understand fully this commitment to heterogeneous classrooms. Do Lopez and Silveira mean to extend the kindergarten-8th grade model into high schools? Does this mean then that they would advocate the elimination of advanced placement and honors classes? This is the logical extension of their position.
   The trend everywhere else in the country is to offer more not fewer advanced and honors classes. As I have said before on this site, parents should be concerned about whether their children are prepared for what comes after MMSD. My children’s college peers have almost all had the full complement of AP classes.
   I recently met an education professor from Marquette University who was shocked to hear of the changes at West. She said that even the most impoverished schools in Milwaukee offer AP, that the movement is to get more students prepared to take those courses, to involve more students enrolled in that challenging curriculum. This cannot be done with the entire ability spectrum present in the classroom.
   I’d appreciate a clear answer on this.

2. It must be noted that supporters of heterogeneous curriculum have never said that this curriculum should eliminate honors and AP classes. In fact, quite the opposite. Supporters of differentiated curriculum, including the Madison Partners for Inclusive Education, strongly are in favor of a high level curriculum for all learners, and that would include the offering of a wide range of honors and AP classes at the high school level.
   I think that it would be helpful if members of various groups who are interested in curriculum offerings get together to find some common ground. I think that we may find a good deal of agreement among ourselves.

3. Perhaps both sides can explain what they’re advocating in concrete terms. I don’t know where I stand on the issue because I don’t have a clear picture of what the 2 sides want.

4. To say that a teacher cannot effectively teach students with a very wide range of abilities (for example, struggling reader to college-level reader) in the same classroom is not an insult to anyone; it is empirically-based reality. (I wonder, have you taken the time to read any of the research articles we have posted here?) One of the best teachers we know once put it to us like this: “I love teaching the full range of students. Just not at the same time!”
   Your use of the phrase “variety of students” in your letter hardly captures the challenge and is, therefore, misleading and manipulative.
   Also, how many times do we have to say this to all of you: no one is arguing for segregating low ability, special education, and other special needs students. You are putting words in our mouths and letting your unfounded anxieties drive your part of the conversation. The fact is, most of us are not saying much of anything about how to best meet the needs of the students with those needs. We are arguing for taking seriously our moral, ethical and — yes — legal responsibility to educate another whole group of students with special needs. Again, you are speaking in irrational and fear-driven ways.
   I often wonder, why ARE you so afraid of having our schools meet the needs of the high ability students in the District? What do you feel you or your children would lose? Do you care about the suffering of and loss of potential in other children?
   Similarly, why do you insist on ignoring the large and consistent empirical literature on this topic (the educational, social and emotional needs of high ability students and how best to meet them, and what happens when these students feel neglected and disengage from school)? And do you realize how many more families will leave the District’s schools if completely heterogeneous classes become District policy through 10th grade?

5. Barbara, excuse me if I find your position inherently contradictory. How do you have heterogeneity, everyone in one class, and AP classes? At West, this thinking has taken a rich menu of honors English classes and reduced it to English 9 and 10, one-size-fits-none.
   I also think it’s important to distinguish academic talent from socioeconomic variables. There is no reason AP classes can’t look like the community. Indeed, others have better articulated their concern that the district has failed to identify or support gifted minority students.

6. The “real world environment” of high school is not the same as the “real world environment” where most of us live and work.
   Where I work, everyone can read and write. No one, to my knowledge, has a drug addiction or deals illegal drugs. No one in my office lives in a homeless shelter. No one has severe learning disabilities or emotional issues or an arrest record. None carry dangerous weapons, at least, I hope not. Yet, high schools have students with all of these issues.
   Now don’t jump all over me. I’m not saying that we should segregate, isolate, discriminate, or otherwise reduce services and expectations for students who don’t fit the picture of “average.”
   But at the same time, I want to stress that most of us do not live and work in the same environment as a high school.
   Imagine your work place if it were like a high school. Twenty to thirty percent of your co-workers couldn’t read, write, or do basic math calculations. One or two might have an emotional outbreak every few days. Some might come in tired and unkempt because they had no place to sleep the previous night. Another might be using drugs in the rest room. The police might stop in your office to make an arrest or interview a witness or suspect.
   High schools have a unique challenge because they indeed take all comers. They don’t get to “hire” some and forget about the others.

7. I’ve *tried* to avoid this debate on purpose, but in doing so, I think I’ve come to some rudimentary conclusions by listening to the different perspectives.
   1)”Inclusion” is NOT heterogeneity. Inclusion specifically targets Special Ed students and ELL/ESL students by including them in the “least restrictive environment” given their individual challenges.
   2) “Heterogeneity” really means a diverse class with all types of learners and performers. Inherent in heterogeneity is differentiation AND the resources to accomplish EQUITABLE DIFFERENTIATION. This is where the student who is 2 grades above his peers gets the services to remain 2 grades above his peers, as well as the inverse, whereby a student who is behind by 2 grades gets the resources to keep pace and (hopefully) catch up to his peers.
   Certainly “inclusion” helps diversify the classroom, but the students’ IEP(s) actually define what differentiation services a student should receive. It should be the MMSD’s goal to have successful heterogeneous classes; however, the MMSD must provide the resources for all kids to be able to perform in a heterogeneous class.
   Perhaps a more equitable elementary and middle school education will provide for more successful heterogeneity at the high school level? I do think this is a fascinating debate!

8. There’s theory and then there’s reality.
   I disagree strenously with the fundamental permise that MMSD’s goal should be to have heterogeneous classes, at least at the high schools. The hard reality is that even the best-trained teacher cannot teach AP level material and at the same time manage to engage a student not reading at grade level in the same classroom. It’s a fantasy.

9. I am afraid that people may not realize that teachers often don’t test children to see what they do know. It is not uncommon for an elementary level teacher to test say in reading only 2 grades above, and not find out how advanced a child is. It is also common for teacher not to see if a child is advanced in math. Usually teachers will not give pre-assessments to see if there are students within the classroom who already know the material that they are about to cover. When a parent questions the teacher, they are looked at as “pushy”.
   There are times where a child say in 2nd or 3rd grade has caught onto reading and can become an advanced reader, and no one ever finds out what level the child is at because often teachers will test only up to 2 grades ahead. There are a number of students who are 4-7 years above the grade level in a subject and still expected to do the grade level work.
   The situation is, some kids just happen to struggle or catch onto things fast, not because of anything anyone else has done or not done. Some feel it is nurture, others feel it is nature, but whatever the reason, MMSD needs to understand that kids even in the upper end deserve to be tested to see what they know.
   It is also not uncommon for a child who is advanced not to get any services because there are only 7 people within the whole district who are associated with the TAG department and if no one has tested the child to see what the true assessment is, the child is “ignored”.
   This is why people who have been anti – hetrogeneous classes, would like kids to be able to self select honor level classes at schools like West. The way English 9 at West is set up, kids reading/comprehending at a 5th grade level and kids who are reading at a college level are suppose to be reading and discussing the same book with no support for the teacher.
   Even in kindergarten, a hetrogeneous classroom can consist on kids who don’t know what letter their name starts with, not able to sing the ABCs, doesn’t know how to count, with kids who are starting to read and counting to 100. There may also be a child or two who are reading “Alice in Wonderland and the Looking Glass” and “Christmas Carol” unabridged or counting money in the same classroom. How is the teacher suppose to reach everyone’s needs? And for the strong reader, shouldn’t they have the right to discuss books at their level? If the classroom is made up of students within a few grades of each other, differentiating can work well. But when you are talking about 8 or more levels different, even the best teacher can not reach everyone’s needs adequately but this is what is expected. I have seen some of the best teachers at work, and unfortunately, one group or the other ends up not getting needs truly met.
   Unfortunately, heterogeneous classes do mean that there would not be advanced level classes. For example, West has gotten rid of a 9th grade honors course a few years ago, as well as not allowing 10th graders honors in English starting next year, in order for heterogeneous classes. I agree with you Barb, that it may be worthwhile for those interested in curriculum get together. This could be very positive for MMSD.
   Judy

10. There’s been lots of discussion that two parent groups in Madison are misrepresenting each other regarding curriculum delivery in MMSD. Here is an attempt to clarify where Madison Partners for Inclusive Schools stands on issues of classroom instructional delivery, and why we as a group do have concerns with a discussion that has been framed by some as a “heterogeneous versus homogeneous” issue. We don’t see it as simplistically as that, and we have real concerns about the implications of “homogeneous” instruction.
    We agree that Madison Partners and parents advocating for gifted/talented both see a need to elevate achievement for all without leaving out/failing any one group of learners.
    Both of us particularly are interested in elevating achievement: we are focused on traditionally underserved/marginalized groups such as students of color and students with disabilities (fully believing that many in these groups are capable of high achievement and that achievement can be defined in multiple ways), while the gifted/talented folks have been primarily focused on students with potential for high achievement.
    We differ on HOW best to do that. While TAG parents are pushing for more pull-out and separate programming almost exclusively as a strategy for success, Partners endorses these strategies:
    — Mixed ability classrooms through 8th grade; some mixed-ability for core courses in high school
    — Total team teaching in the classrooms (including special ed/regular ed/ELL/spec ed asst/SLP/social worker/psychologist when appropriate)
    — Differentiated curriculum
    — Individualized programming when appropriate and in the classroom whenever possible (Including TAG/ELL/Spec. Ed)
    — Increased infusion of honors-level and college-prep level content into core courses whenever possible to elevate content in required courses, with modifications as needed to meet individual learning goals/objectives
    Nowhere has Partners (or anyone to our knowledge either running for school board or working at MMSD) endorsed ending AP courses, reducing the number of AP courses, or totally eliminating honors options, particularly for upperclassmen. Quite the opposite: Partners is interested in how students of all backgrounds and “labels” (and this does mean students with disabilities) can increase their access to AP courses.
    In addition, NO ONE from Partners or from MMSD or on the school board or running for school board every called for COMPLETELY heterogeneous classes. In the interest of fairness, this error needs to be corrected.
    Here is Partners’ list of concerns about homogeneous grouping that we would like to be addressed:
    — How would the “groupings” be identified and by whom?
    — How and who will ensure authentic assessment, particularly for children where English is not their first language; where learning or physical disability precludes their ability to access testing materials, etc.
    — How would curriculum and teachers be assigned? What assurances would be in place that the “less-able children” don’t get the least experienced teachers and lower quality curriculum? (There are historic trends showing that this is exactly what happens in many districts).
    — What specific strategies do you use to reduce the achievement gap and elevate outcomes for all students when you are further distancing “lower-performing” students from the opportunities and curriculum offered to higher-performing students?
    — What are the strategies to avoid court cases from civil rights groups? (There is a history of civil rights groups recently suing schools that continue to ability-group, particularly when a pattern of race and/or limited placement options for children with disabilities can be attached to the grouping.)
    — What specific strategies would you use to ensure racial/socio-economic diversity within homogeneous groupings?
    Like others on this blog, we would refer readers back to Adam Gamoran’s presentation on ability-grouping and tracking, which he made to the board of education in January. In it, he laid out many of the concerns associated with homogeneous grouping that we make above. While acknowledging that tracking isn’t always the worst solution (see his citings of Catholic high school studies), he also reiterates that it is seldom the preferred solution to elevating outcomes for all. We agree.
    Kristina Grebener, Barb Katz, Jane Lambert, Randy Lambert, Beth Moss, Lisa Pugh, Thomas Purnell, Beth Swedeen, and Terry Tuschen on behalf of Madison Partners for Inclusive Schools

11. Thanks for posting this Jane. As these issues have surfaced (or, more accurately, intensified) in the “heat” of the election battle, I hope the community can continue the discussion as cooler heads prevail. We still have a long way to go before everyone is on the same page regarding “heterogeneity” philosophies.

12. The discussion of “heterogeneous vs. advanced” classes that began in response to West High’s new English 10 course has slowly morphed from exaggeration to hysteria. On this blog, it has become common wisdom that “Unfortunately, heterogeneous classes do mean that there would not be advanced level classes.” (see edukation4u above) This false dichotomy is the product of a worldview that regards contact with the masses as a threat to the brilliance of our gifted children.
    At West High, a typical college-bound student takes a core of 5 traditional academic classes, PE/Health, and often music, art, computer-assisted design, computer programming or another academic elective. Advanced West students usually begin their foreign language at level 2 and continue through level 5 AP with advanced peers. Advanced West students usually begin math with honors geometry and continue through Calculus 1 AP with advanced peers. Following freshman biology, advanced West students usually take math-intensive chemistry and Accelerated Math Physics with advanced peers and then take senior year advanced science seminars in Astrophysics, physics or chemistry. As juniors, advanced West students will usually begin honors English courses. As seniors, advanced West students will usually take advanced social studies electives. Commonly, these students will successfully complete AP exams in foreign language, English, social studies and calculus.
    Beginning next fall, an advanced student who completes “only” 20 academic course/years (4 years of 5 academic courses) will have exactly 6 heterogeneous classes: biology, English 9 & 10, and Social Studies 9, 10 & 11. For the traditional advanced student at West (child of 2 college-educated parents), the establishment of English 10 represents a very small increase in heterogeneous classes (from 25 to 30%) in what is otherwise a monoculture of middle-to-upper-class, college-bound peers. But on this blog, English 10 is routinely represented as the beginning of the end for academic excellence. Please wake me when West’s astounding proportion of National Merit Semi-finalists begins to wane.
    On the other side of the coin, kids who are not obviously college bound have been traditionally segregated into a lower course track as freshman and rarely share an academic class with advanced students. By the time they become upperclassmen, the achievement gap has widened to a chasm in every academic subject and classroom segregation is all but complete.
    To address this problem, West has taken several modest steps. Recently, most of the general math classes were eliminated in order to channel more freshman directly into algebra (note that freshmen who are strong in math take honors geometry). It has begun to offer Spanish for native speakers to focus on grammar and writing. Beginning next year, it eliminated several lower content English electives in favor of a new and more rigorous English 10 aimed at all students. (Supplemental English enrichment courses are available for freshmen and sophomores with less than proficient reading and writing.)
    Poorly prepared but bright students will now have up to two years of contact with advanced students in English and three years in social studies. This is an opportunity for them to meet new kids, discover an academic interest and find the inspiration to improve their performance. No guarantees, but a fair opportunity. And from the standpoint of all students, the value of social diversity in the study and discussion of modern literature and history is well understood…everywhere but on this blog.
    The principal and faculty at West are working steadily to forge a more unified culture in a school of breathtaking racial, national and social variety. In order to share a common school culture, students from disparate backgrounds must get to know each other, and there is no more effective way to do that than to take a class together.
    Is it too much to ask that an advanced student spend 6 academic course/years (out of 20+) in rigorous classes with “mixed company” before heading off to 14+ course/years of advanced academics, AP exams and an exclusive college? Is it too much to ask that a poorly prepared but bright student be allowed at least some academic contact with advanced students during his or her early HS years? The benefits of social interaction between these two different adolescents are valued most everywhere…but on this blog.
    Like much in life, public education is a balance of academic and social development. For those who believe that social diversity in 30% of their child’s classes is the antithesis of academic advancement, I would recommend Madison Country Day School. And may their children be lucky enough to begin their careers in the cocoon of Madison’s west side.

13. Short answer, Neil, yes.

14. A document that was endorsed by DPI and Wisconsin Talent and Gifted Association (WATG) can be found at http://www.focol.org/watg/. This documentation includes how to test TAG students as well has how to handle needs of these children. There are a number of tests and scores available in this document to show how to “declare” who needs to be labeled gifted and to what level.
    Over the years, there have been a number of MMSD staff who want to get rid of honor and AP classes, or at least not supportive of them. This includes our own Superintendent has stated a number of times that his daughter wasn’t involved in her school’s TAG program yet is doing fine. Frankly, he has gave me the impression that his daughter didn’t need it so no one does. Would he say the same thing about Special Ed?
    Homogeneous classes to me, is leveling every child K-12, and I am not into that. I also completely understand that if a child is struggling, you don’t want them to feel that they are “dumb” and give up which would happen in homogeneous classrooms. I am sure we have all seen children stuggle and then later become a high flyer. Maybe it was a teacher, a situation at home, or other personal situations that either caused the child to struggle or to allow them to fly. Our State DPI suggests cluster ability grouping, so say in Social studies a child may know a lot about presidents and may be in the higher ability group for this, yet when studying European History, he may be in a heterogeneous classroom.
    A child may be 2E, advanced in math by 2 grades and LD in reading. Shouldn’t they be able to have their math abilities challenged, even when they are struggling with reading? In a heterogeneous classes, they would be learning grade level math. Wouldn’t it be nice for this child to see that there are other kids who are also 2 grades ahead in math? With the middle school CMP program, it is based on reading. So this child who is in 5th grade and doing 7th grade math how is he going to be successful when he enters 6th grade and has to do CMP math for 8th grade? He probably won’t get help with his math, because of his mathematical ability. This would also cause massive self esteem issues if he had to do 6th grade math again.
    Pull outs don’t work, it is not continuous teaching or learning. A child is not gifted only when someone comes to tutor them in a subject, nor do they only struggle when someone is there to help. Also, those who have requested “special curriculum” have also asked to allow kids to self choose these classes. So if a child who loved Shakespeare but also happened to be LD in reading, could still elect to take this course. No one is saying, oh, you are not smart enough to take this class. As I had said in another area, I have seen say on TV where a child who was LD in reading was number one in her graduating class. Just because someone has a disability doesn’t mean they can’t do something, they just may have to do it differently or spend work harder to do it.
    I feel that we are dumbing our children down by not allowing them to explore their interests. I watch the Young Shakespeare Players plays where kids of all different ages and ability levels work together to put on a wonderful play. There interests may be in acting, maybe in Shakespeare, it may even be for social. Often when kids are forced to do something like this, they are not successful. But when they are their because they want to be, it is so neat to see the dynamics. This is why I am saddened that West changed there English programs for only a few children who where not successful.
    With the idea of heterogeneous classes up through 8th grade, means you do not currently support the district’s program of testing 5th graders for an advanced math program.( I have not kept current on exactly what they are looking at now, so I can’t go into detail on this.) This is where they test kids for math placements in middle school and take 6th, 7th, or 8th grade math (in rare instances there may even be those who are ready for higher math than this). Heterogeneous classes means that the 6th graders who are ready for 8th grade math would not be allowed to take them. This also means that, 7th graders would not take High School Algebra. I don’t know the exact numbers, but I have heard at Hamilton there are approx. 15-20 students in 7th grade who take High School Algebra yearly. Currently these kids will be able to take Calc 2 and Stats as seniors.
    So, with heterogeneous classrooms through 8th grade, you are advocating for these children would not be “grouped” together, and a teacher would either need to be teaching 7th, 8th, and Algebra within the same classroom or all kids would be taking 7th grade math. I would be very surprised that even the best teachers could teach 3 different curriculums and differentiate within those curriculums at the same time. What happens when your child who needs Algebra as a 7th or even 8th grade, happens to have a teacher who is certified K-8. They can not teach High School Algebra (I believe legally they can not teach it in a public school), so the kid can sit through grade level math another year.
    Again, supporting heterogeneous classrooms through 8th grade is saying that AP Calc, AP Calc 2 and AP Stats would all be eliminated because if kids are taking 8th grade math in 8th grade, they will not be able to take the advanced level classes.
    Neil, you need to take High School Algebra before Geometry, and you wouldn’t be able to do that in heterogeneous classrooms if they are K-8. Are you saying that my children are not advanced because they do not come from 2 college educated parents? And that 2 college level educated parents don’t have average or children with other needs? You seem to be stating that kids are only bright because of what advantages they have had. There are a number of smart kids who are poor and who don’t have college educated parents who are also gifted. And just because someone went to college doesn’t mean they are intelligent.
    I also know a number of college graduates who were classified under the Section 504 Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Just because someone has a physical or mental impairment, doesn’t mean they can’t be successful both high school curriculum (including honor and AP courses) and in college, which tells me that someone who is classified in “special ed” still can become very successful in advanced classes. They may need some special services, but this is up to the special ed department to get these need addressed.
    Remember the movie, Stand and Deliver? The teacher was the reason that kids wanted to be successful. The kids, who others had given up on, were successful in AP Calc. To me, an adult in a child’s life will have them step up to the plate and help the achievement gap. Maybe this is a teacher, coach, someone from church, parent, etc. It would be nice if we all had someone in our lives to get us excited to learning. Sometimes it is that kindergarten teacher, other times, a child couldn’t state anyone has encouraged them.
    I am I correct that in order to identify someone who is LD, or cognitively delayed, they are given a type of IQ testing? I also remember being told about children who where not classified special ed – (LD, etc) but where still years behind grade level. Should special ed ignore them? Recently I found out that many districts around the country including here in Wisconsin, have all kids take IQ type tests at least once if not 3 times within the kids school careers in order to help identify those who are advanced. Madison doesn’t do this for identifying higher end kids. If you think about it, if a child who is tested as a 2nd grader and scored high and is caring lower than average grades, maybe the district needs to intervene with this child. Maybe they need a mentor who can inspire them. I feel that the district should be working with these kids individually to figure out what is going on, not just put everyone into one class and let the strongest survive. I feel that this is telling those who may have potential that they don’t matter. I also realize that one test is not perfect for everyone. But it is at least a start.
    Neil, You are also assuming that an advanced child is strong in math. Maybe she is advanced in English, which means 11 years of hetrogeneous classes. She may be taking Japanese, Latin, Chinese, Italian, or another language that their middle school didn’t teach so they are not advanced in this either. Also, just because a child is taking say Spanish 2 as a freshman, doesn’t mean they are with academic peers because this class would be made up of Freshman, Sophomores, Juniors and Seniors, of all different academic levels. DPI states that “Advanced” foreign Language starts 3rd year because there are a number of colleges who require or highly recommend 2 years of foreign language.
    (Supplemental English enrichment courses are available for freshmen and sophomores with less than proficient reading and writing.) I don’t know if this is true for 9th grade, I have only seen it in writing for 10th. So, they are asking someone who struggles to take 2 classes of English, Math, Science, Social Studies, and Phy Ed. They would be allowed to take one elective. And if the child is also struggling in Algebra or Geometry, then they have 2 math periods and no electives. Boy that would make me want to go to school.
    What is the 5th grader who is ready for High School Algebra suppose to do? Wait for 4 years?
    Even if a child is “advanced”, maybe they want to be a mechanic, a fire person, open a sub shop, etc. And frankly, even if a child is advanced, there is nothing wrong with our in state unversities or technical colleges in my view. Just because a child is bright doesn’t mean they can’t have choices in what they do, they may just have more choices.
    West also changed it’s English 10 curriculum for a small number of students who were not successful. Until next year, West allowed 10th graders to self select his/her English classes. If the child enjoyed a topic (ex. Shakespeare), they could take the course. It is an honors level course, but if a child enjoyed the topic, they would be more inclined to work harder at it. This is not “labeling” children, but rather allowing kids to explore their interests.
    It was mentioned that individualized programming when needed should be done (including TAG, Spec. Ed, ELL)- A problem with this idea is again Spec. Ed and ELL have people on site who can help with this, and the district has 1 person in TAG to deal with 6 elementary schools, and 1 person for all the middle and high schools. Again, this is putting the burden on the classroom teacher than to come up with the programming that is needed. Teachers have enough work trying to differentiate, trying to do another curriculum for a child who is a number of grades ahead isn’t going to work. This one child will sit on his hands. If the children are at least grouped so there where 6 students who where in the upper end, may work, but again I have seen it where the teacher still teaches to the regular curriculum and doesn’t differentiate.
    I will agree, I am not in favor of “grouping” the advanced children and teaching them grade level work which is sometimes done. If there is going to be “grouping” I expect that the classroom teacher will be teaching these children at the next level, both in breadth and depth. I would much rather see schools go to the old school house ways where kids of different ages are together and the teachers need to individualize everyone’s work. Every child is working at their own rate and on material that is appropriate for him. But, in reality, how small of classes do we need to have in order to perform a situation like this and how much money can we spend?
    We all pay for public education, shouldn’t all children deserve an education that meets their needs? If the district isn’t going to meet the needs of the high end, then they need to tell families that they are sorry but this is all that they can do. If a child needs more, the district should then parents to look at private schools, move to Memorial area, or going outside the district where the percentages of Above average students will become higher. (By the way Neil, watch the National Merit Semi Finalist numbers in the next 3 years or so. I will predict West numbers will go down while Memorial’s will jump). West also is claiming the scores of one child who is homeschooled and is only here because of Katrina.
    28 Memorial students
    2 East
    1 LaFollette
    30 West – Breakdown of West students:
    17 Hamilton including 6 who moved into the district and 1 transferred from Wright to Hamilton
    2 Cherokee
    7 Eagle (including 2 who transferred to Eagle)
    3 moved to West
    1 Homeschool high school
    As I look at the numbers, I question where should one go to school and get their higher end needs met?

15. I’m on my way out, but feel the need to quickly correct something in edukation4U’s post. I was in exclusively heterogeneous classrooms through 8th grade. These were very mixed in abilities, interests, socio-economic status… I finished high school with AP credits in History (2 years), English, Chemistry, Physics and the Calculus. Heterogeneous classrooms being the norm (especially K-8) do not preclude extensive AP coursework. This is a false choice.
    And yes, I only did “Calc 1,” I had to wait for college for “Calc 2.” I can’t imagine anyone suffering from long term deprivations because their local school did not provide an opportunity to do “Calc 2” before graduating high school. I think it would be wonderful if we could provide that opportunity, but with the resources at hand I can’t see making it a priority.
    TJM

16. Actually Thomas, if a child is totally in hetrogeneous classes through 8th grade, they will take Algebra in 9th, Geometry in 10th, Trig in 11th and Pre-Calc in 12th. A few years ago West dropped the Trig/PreCalc (Both within one year). And I am not aware of the other schools ever even offering this program. So, A child wouldn’t take AP Calc during high school. West doesn’t even offer AP classes in History, English, Chemistry, or Physics and if it dropped Calc 1, Calc 2 and Stats because there were not the numbers for the classes, this would leave West with 5 AP classes in Spanish, Latin, French, Comp Sci and Music Theory.
    So again, a child who is gifted in math would not be able to take any AP courses in math during his K-12 schooling if everyone is in heterogeneous classrooms and wouldn’t be in higher end classes until 11th grade?.
    Judy

17. Judy
    My point was that students in exclusively mixed ability classrooms through 8th grade can and do end up with extensive AP credits. I know this because I did this. The either/or is demonstrably false.
    You raise another very good, related issue, and that concerns what AP classes are being offered or should be offered. I also see you are concerned about the sequence of courses to get students to these classes. First, let me say that we probably agree that there should be AP English and History offerings at all the high schools. I believe Memorial has AP science offerings. I would also like to see these expanded, although I don’t think that MMSD can afford to do that for all four schools. Second, let me make an important point and that is we don’t need to start these discussions with what exists, we need to start them with what are the best realistic options.
    The calculus sequence you spelled out speaks to this. The students in my long ago AP calculus course got there in one of two ways. Some middle schools offered a 3 day a week before school Algebra class to interested students. These students then took Geometry in 9th grade, Algebra 2 in 10th, Alg/Trig in 11th and the Calculus in 12th. There was no pre-calculus. Others doubled up on Geometry and Algebra 1 or 2 in 9th or 10th. Both sequences worked. With the budget issues we have to be creative. Maybe pre-Calc needs to go, maybe 8th grade Algebra…Maybe that’s a way to get an AP History course.
    I will say I find it strange that the AP offerings are all in Science and Language at West.
    In the context of this discussion it might also be worth pointing out that in my own case, I took both Geometry and and Algebra 2 in regular (mixed ability) and not honors sections (those were offered) and did fine when I got to Alg-Trig (only honors sections).
    This is more about my life than anyone needs to know, yet like all of us my experiences have shaped my beliefs.
    TJM

18. East offers trig, precalc, and Calc AB and CalcBC. They don’t stick AP on the calc classes, but believe me – they are college level and lead to AP and/or college credits.
    The issue with heterogeneous classrooms is not whether kids end up in AP classes. The issue is whether they are able to offer kids the “next level of challenge” called for in DPI regs. IF heterogeneous grouping is combined with generous IN-STEPing to allow advanced students to go to the appropriate level, it would put the model closer to meeting all children’s needs. This could be done by curricular area (e.g. IN-STEP in math, English, whatever), or across the board for students who are advanced across the board and need advanced opportunities all day every day.
    Such a model would retain students with a range of abilities in each classroom, but some of the students would be younger than others.
    Just my 2 cents.

19. I agree Lucy that math kids should be advanced in grades to whatever level they are at. Also, as a child becomes older say, 4th and above (depending on their emotional maturity), this may be a good alternative across the board in subjects for them. In my view, Science may depend on their reading levels also. But a child who is strong in Language arts and/or Social Studies, this may be a little problematic. Think of a kindergartener or 1st grader in a 4th or 5th grade room. In 4th and 5th grades, my experience has been they use English materials that intertwined in Science and History. Then it may make sense for the kid to move head in these classes also if they are studying more science and/or history. A child in K/1st, probably isn’t emotionally ready for the war novels that may be covered in 5th grade. So in cases like this, being placed in academically leveled cases wouldn’t really work. Language arts would probably need to have it’s curriculum changed if there where younger kids in the classroom. This is an area where I wonder if having an “advanced” level class or individual curriculum would be better depending on how many kids this would really involve.
    Another problem with this concept is to think that a child who is say a 4th grader doing high school algebra, will probably be still catching onto the subject faster than the grade level students. From what I have gathered from people who have had children in classes a number of years ahead and with my own children, the material is correct but the pace is often still too slow. What will take the 9th grader to accomplish in a year, the 4th grader may be able to finished with it within a semester or less. So, does the child sit in the higher level class still bored over 1/2 of the time, or do they go onto the next level within that same year. I don’t know.
    I think that this is a great option, but I don’t feel that it is always the best option for all gifted children.

20. Your post points to the challenges with meeting the needs of children with a range of special needs including TAG: the amazing range of abilities, needs, and appropriate actions. This is where the IN-STEP process is supposed to help advanced students, and IEPs are supposed to help students with other special needs (some of whom also are TAG students – twice blessed as they say).
    While my son preferred and thrived on pull-out direct instruction when he began learning to read, he ended up needing minimal support along the lines of tutoring and advocacy for extended time to take tests by the time he graduated. Other students do better in inclusive settings.
    My other son was perfectly fine taking sophomore advanced classes at East as an 8th grader. Other students may have been intimidated by the size of the school and its students.
    The fact is, there is no single way to do things. The challenge is to listen to each other and to people who are in the classrooms, to figure out how to move forward in a practical and effective way.

Comments are closed.