tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post7555881487412913710..comments2024-03-26T04:19:38.862-07:00Comments on kitchen table math, the sequel: cranberry on wealthy schools & the sorting machineCatherine Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-59311197921533058752009-03-02T08:28:00.000-08:002009-03-02T08:28:00.000-08:00Catherine, I found Attewell's explanation, or bett...Catherine, I found Attewell's explanation, or better defined, correlations, fascinating. As I remember, he found this pattern of tracking most clearly in school districts with 1) many professional parents, and 2) many gifted children. It makes a certain type of sense. First, professional parents are accustomed to passing through gateways to succeed. College, grad school, internships, first jobs, partnership... In the typical career trajectory for doctors, lawyers, professors, etc., they pass through stages in which many candidates are washed out, and only the elect pass. So, a narrowing system of opportunities makes sense to these parents, and they may not even realize that alternatives exist.<BR/><BR/>Second, yes, many gifted children also makes sense. If any rational set of criteria would qualify more children, the power to exclude those children gives the administration an enormous amount of power. Think about it. I know parents who will not protest anything our school does, because they are afraid of repercussions. Those parents most likely to engage with the system, the parents of bright children, who are paying attention, are much safer baking cookies and writing letters supporting bond issues.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-1747056284735010622009-03-02T07:30:00.000-08:002009-03-02T07:30:00.000-08:00On community college - the choices here after Math...On community college - the choices here after Math B or IA2 are CC (which is now renamed Suny-county) college algebra, trig, calcI, calc II or precalc taught at h.s. or IB Math. Only precalc is free. <BR/><BR/>Community criticism is that it costs a lot to do options 1 and 3, especially for homeowners who are already paying high school taxes and for red/free lunchers. <BR/><BR/>For what I'm paying in school taxes, I could just send my kid to the CC full time at 16, if that was the education I wanted. I would prefer the option of an open admission rigorous free college prep sequence on campus, just like my rural midwestern high school provided to allthat wish to partake.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-10656026627366257192009-03-02T07:25:00.000-08:002009-03-02T07:25:00.000-08:00>>Or is it that instruction is getting poore...>>Or is it that instruction is getting poorer and poorer so the tracking is holding back those who we believe wouldn't have been held back a generation ago?<BR/><BR/>Those who aren't being allowed to take the 8th gr algebra path are qualified. They are the stanine 7 and 8 kids who have been placed in the fully included sections of elementary..the sections where the grade level course is not covered. Had their summative grades in 6th grade been given consideration over the formative, the students would have been seen as individuals smart enough to make up the deficiencies and qualified for 7th accel.(which is really just the standard pre-algebra course).<BR/>As it is, we now have kids who rank in the top 15% of math students statewide (as objectively measured by the state math test), but are not allowed to get into 8th gr. Algebra because of 6th grade grades and lack of teacher recommendation. It's a nice cozy nest of underacheivers created by the school district.<BR/><BR/>For me personally, it is a blessing. My kid can now take a decent course from Johns Hopkins' CTY or the like while he earns an easy A at school.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-14006664756519512232009-03-02T06:54:00.000-08:002009-03-02T06:54:00.000-08:00Minnesota has the PSEO (post-secondary enrollment ...Minnesota has the PSEO (post-secondary enrollment option, I think), which allows qualified high school students the option of taking classes at a local community college or university, with tuition/fees/books paid by their local school district. It is primarily used by juniors and seniors, but I have heard of kids going straight to community college from 9th grade. My son was unhappy with the foreign language at his high school and switched to community college courses which were outstanding. It's a wonderful program.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-50512146537115154202009-03-02T04:37:00.000-08:002009-03-02T04:37:00.000-08:00I'm in favor of dual-enrollment if the high school...I'm in favor of dual-enrollment if the high school student is enrolled in an actual class at the community college. If, however, the community college just slaps a course number onto the high school class or runs a special section just for high school students, then I'm not impressed.<BR/><BR/>Of course, while this view may hold in the general case, there are some situations where it doesn't hold. The calculus class at the community college won't be as good as the one at Thomas Jefferson High School or Stuyvesant High School or an Ivy League college. But it will be better than the majority of what most high schools call "calculus."<BR/><BR/>And, all that being said, I'm vehemently opposed to AB calculus in high schools. Either a kid is ready for real calculus (BC) or else the kid needs more practice with algebra and trig. AB calculus takes out the hardest third of BC calculus and then takes a whole year to teach the easier two-thirds.Rudbeckia Hirtahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06332438100772097804noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-63540679645112845872009-03-01T17:04:00.000-08:002009-03-01T17:04:00.000-08:00Yes to Keller. I've read everything I could get fo...Yes to Keller. I've read everything I could get for free on the web. I feel like it's part of my DNA.<BR/><BR/>When I have these discussions with my peers I fear my DNA has mutated to something utterly different than theirs. It's like they just want to make better cereal and I want to spread all the Cheerios out on the high chair so kids can eat whatever they can reach.<BR/><BR/>I don't think the nature of the cereal is nearly as important as the way it gets eaten.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-70588924652241072009-03-01T16:36:00.000-08:002009-03-01T16:36:00.000-08:00Paul - have you looked at Keller Method courses?I ...Paul - have you looked at Keller Method courses?<BR/><BR/>I have GOT to get the post about the Australian law professor who taught a law course via Keller method up....Catherine Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-41285692758971510842009-03-01T16:35:00.000-08:002009-03-01T16:35:00.000-08:00chemprof -- thanks!That was certainly my impressio...chemprof -- thanks!<BR/><BR/>That was certainly my impression.Catherine Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-1375489447884600502009-03-01T16:26:00.000-08:002009-03-01T16:26:00.000-08:00It is very common in a debate to cede the domain o...It is very common in a debate to cede the domain of the debate to the interrogator, i.e. a question like, "What is the best Frizdoodle?", can shape the entire discussion around Frizdoodles, to the exclusion of everything else. This thread is like that. It's essentially a debate about how to select and fill static 'slots' in a static curricula.<BR/><BR/>If the goal of education is to maximize each student's potential (and I think it is) then you need a system that puts each student into a dynamic setting that empowers him or her to move and excel at a suitable pace.<BR/><BR/>We have a public school system that pretty much makes time the constant and learning the variable. Tracking, as discussed here, simply enables that line of thinking.<BR/><BR/>Wouldn't it be better to make the learning the constant and time the variable? Tracking would become moot, mastery the norm. Movement through the system would automatically keep kids in their ZPD and at the peak of their potential.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-37904059078825134082009-03-01T15:56:00.000-08:002009-03-01T15:56:00.000-08:00Still and all, teachers at community colleges typi...<I>Still and all, teachers at community colleges typically have at least an M.A. in the subject they're teaching (and usually a Ph.D.? Is that right?)</I><BR/><BR/>This varies by state. In California, they must have an MA or equivalent (I had to get certification from my Ph.D. program to work as a lab instructor when I was ABD), but many have Ph.D.'s, since there is a lot of competition for those jobs, especially for the full-time positions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-33169201493088247222009-03-01T15:19:00.000-08:002009-03-01T15:19:00.000-08:00I fall into the camp that says the decision should...<I>I fall into the camp that says the decision should ultimately be up to the kids and their parents. However, I want schools to deal honestly with the conflict between full inclusion in K-6 and tracking starting in seventh grade. </I><BR/><BR/>ditto that<BR/><BR/>What I'm talking about (for now) is an asymmetry in tracking between math/science on one hand and ELA/social studies/foreign language on the other. Attewell found the same thing: "over-tracking" specifically in math/science.<BR/><BR/>Full inclusion is for ELA/social studies/foreign languages.<BR/><BR/>Tracking is for math/science.<BR/><BR/><BR/>In the middle school, the only accelerated courses offered are in math/science: accelerated math in 6th, 7th, and 8th; Earth Science in 8th. There is nothing available in ELA, social studies, or foreign languages.<BR/><BR/>If you're verbally talented you spend those 3 years reading a handful of books at the 5th grade level.<BR/><BR/>Another result of this policy, obviously, is that verbally talented kids have no opportunities to develop their talents. They read some books and "write" a couple of papers that are too hard for any of the kids to write....and when everyone gets to high school the math/science kids are way out in front while the verbal kids have suffered through 3 years of the over-accelerated math course while not learning to write and not having done any significant reading.<BR/><BR/>btw, I don't for a moment buy Attewell's explanation for why this is happening.Catherine Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-20394919951103450522009-03-01T14:24:00.000-08:002009-03-01T14:24:00.000-08:00wow -- fantastic thread here -- I need to get ALL ...wow -- fantastic thread here -- I need to get ALL of these comments pulled up front.<BR/><BR/>Attewell's study, along with Elmore's article on nominally high-performing schools, is a core issue for me, certainly --- and I think for the country, too.Catherine Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-70763036981135143402009-03-01T14:18:00.000-08:002009-03-01T14:18:00.000-08:00Hi Rudbeckia - if you're still here - What do ...Hi Rudbeckia - if you're still here - <BR/><BR/>What do you think of dual enrollment?<BR/><BR/>ie: have high school juniors & seniors take courses at the local community college....<BR/><BR/>I'm in favor, though I haven't given it a lot of thought. Still and all, teachers at community colleges typically have at least an M.A. in the subject they're teaching (and usually a Ph.D.? Is that right?)Catherine Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03347093496361370174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-20751142167457692872009-03-01T09:13:00.000-08:002009-03-01T09:13:00.000-08:00The original idea of mainstreaming was far enough ...The original idea of mainstreaming was far enough back in the mists of time that the whole current bottom layer of children never entered the public school system. The kids with severe intellectual, medical,and psychiatric problems were most likely to be in residental facilities, until such facilities started being closed in the 70s. Even without these kids, the original idea was that the bottom 10% and the top 10% of students should not be mainstreamed.<BR/><BR/>In far too many schools, these kids are placed in classrooms where their behavior disrupts learning for the rest of the class. At the same time, their own educational needs are not being met. The one-size-fits-all approach means that too many kids (at all levels) don't get the education they need.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-42001944990606336442009-02-28T09:59:00.000-08:002009-02-28T09:59:00.000-08:00I figured they can't stop you from looking at what...<I>I figured they can't stop you from looking at what they have. I just wonder what their reaction would be if I asked. </I><BR/><BR/>Usually, the exact content of what goes into a students official school record file is specified by law, by regulation and by specific district policies. Required documents include report cards, IEPs, suspension documentation, custody orders, immigration status documentation, and more, mosly very official documents of legal import. Parental consent may be required for some documents, such as psychological reports, to go in the file (they are centrally filed in the relevant district department if they do not go in the student's file).<BR/><BR/>The regulations also <B>exclude </B>many items, so schools always have other files on students -- these may be central or classroom-based or both. Examples of things kept outside the official school file, but usually kept for several years even if a student leaves, are test protocols and results (formal testing, standardized testing, formative assessment, screening tests, informal observations), anecdotal records of behavior, parent contact logs, work samples, correspondence (notes from home, communication logs, formal letters that do not meet criteria for inclusion in the school record folder).<BR/><BR/>You have a legal right to see what is in the official record -- in most places you must make a request in writing. In my experience schools discourage this, mainly because to set up appointment for a great many parents to avail themselves of this right would be a real strain on office resources and manpower, as usually an administrator must be present and a private room provided. You probably do not have a right to see all the documents the school may have filed (test protocols, for instance, are not usually made available to the parents -- a report is supposed to be shared), and you would likely be unable to prove that the school even had such a file. <BR/><BR/>Of course, they do; they have to have a place to store the documents that need to be kept but are not appropriate for the student record file. Individual teachers may vary as to how ready they are to share what they have with you. <BR/><BR/><I>Perhaps what might be more of an issue is what information do they NOT put in the file. Do schools carefully decide what goes in and what doesn't? Are records cleansed?</I><BR/><BR/>School personnel have little flexibility in this regard, as the school record file is standardized. Even the order of what goes where is spelled out and must be observed. There are very few items that are discretionary where the school record file is concerned. Usually an administrator or someone designated by administration carefully reviews each file at the end of the school year to ensure it is in proper order.<BR/><BR/>School records <I>may </I>be "cleansed" -- some documents stay forever (report cards), but material that is out of date -- old IEPs from earlier years, medical or other reports that are several years old, outdated custody orders (for example, earlier prohibitions on a parent picking up the child when the earlier document is superseded by a court order granting joint custody) and so on.<BR/><BR/>When children move outside the district or the state there are other protocols for what documents are to be removed from the file before it is forwarded (if it is) to the new school. Most districts forward to another district in the same state but many do not send the actual record file to another state or country or to a private school. Regulations on these matters vary.palisadeskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13700503881038569921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-42983505785605749642009-02-28T04:55:00.000-08:002009-02-28T04:55:00.000-08:00"Steve, there's a law called "FERPA" which entitle..."Steve, there's a law called "FERPA" which entitles you to access your kid's educational records."<BR/><BR/>I figured they can't stop you from looking at what they have. I just wonder what their reaction would be if I asked. Perhaps what might be more of an issue is what information do they NOT put in the file. Do schools carefully decide what goes in and what doesn't? Are records cleansed?SteveHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956560674752399562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-77009101115870001462009-02-28T04:49:00.000-08:002009-02-28T04:49:00.000-08:00When I was in K-12 (50's and 60's) the schools tra...When I was in K-12 (50's and 60's) the schools tracked out the lowest level kids. For the rest (in K-6) they were tracked by holding them back or forcing them to go to summer school. It's perhaps a stretch to describe tracking this way, but they wanted to keep all kids together in K-6 content and skill-wise. I can understand why some don't like this model.<BR/><BR/>My view is that K-6 teachers and schools are nurturing types and envisioned a system where all kids played, worked, and learned together. This required changes in assumptions about what K-6education is all about. Content knowledge (memorization) and mastery of skills had to be minimized, and enrichment had to replace acceleration. That's the only way they could get full inclusion to work. It was clear that at my son's schools, differentiated instruction was brought in to try and make full inclusion work. They know that there are issues, and they see all of the kids shipped off to private schools, but they still think it can work as a model for public education, where all kids have to be educated.<BR/><BR/>However, when I taught the SSAT after-school course last year, I saw bright seventh graders struggling to make the transition from the low expectation, developmentally-appropriate ideas of K-6 to the real work of learning content and mastering skills in high school. Many will make the transition just fine because they're quite capable or because they have help from their parents or tutors. One long-time teacher told me that the kids who get hurt the most are the ones in the middle, or those who have no support at home. Enough kids do well in high school, and that allows the lower schools to think they're on the right track.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I think there is little difference then and now about the power teachers have over your child. However, in the old days, it usually surfaced as bad grades or warnings about the risk of summer school. Nowadays, your child might just get different material or lower, developmentally-appropriate expectations in the same classroom and you won't know about it for years. The main premise of Everyday Math is that spiraling will take care of everything. Mastery of basic skills will come eventually when the child is ready to learn. It doesn't happen. Then in seventh grade, the big filter starts to be applied and it's too late unless parents take drastic action.SteveHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956560674752399562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-68149821849312312762009-02-28T04:00:00.000-08:002009-02-28T04:00:00.000-08:00Steve, there's a law called "FERPA" which entitles...Steve, there's a law called "FERPA" which entitles you to access your kid's educational records.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-14769034680650880012009-02-27T20:28:00.000-08:002009-02-27T20:28:00.000-08:00btw, on the other thread, about the decline at the...btw, on the other thread, about the decline at the top, did you see my followups to your comment? I'd be interested to see what current reccomendation writing policies are in high school, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-2642793039264933092009-02-27T20:26:00.000-08:002009-02-27T20:26:00.000-08:00--I fall into the camp that says the decision shou...--I fall into the camp that says the decision should ultimately be up to the kids and their parents. However, I want schools to deal honestly with the conflict between full inclusion in K-6 and tracking starting in seventh grade. <BR/><BR/>To the first point: that goes back to the issue of control. We no longer trust that the teachers know best, so it should be up to us. We don't want teachers controlling the pipeline because we have so little evidence that they know what's best for our kids, and their choices have such far reaching consequences. But this undermines their only asset, their authority, because their power doesn't come from knowing more material than the rest of us know. So they aren't going to concede the point. <BR/><BR/>To the second point: in the 40s and 50s, schools dealt honestly with the conflict by tracking earlier, and that probably had its drawbacks. Lgms' comments that at least other districts provide you the chance to move up a track are heartening. Your guess that by 7th grade, tracking's a foregone conclusion--just the natural variance being enough of a problem for one room--fits my intuition too. But I'm not sure expectations are lower for students now. And the parent part seems to be a regional phenomenon. It's not happening here, that's for sure.<BR/><BR/>still, you're right about the disconnect between full inclusion and what's to come. however, i think more cynically about full inclusion as lip service. I still think teachers made up their mind, just as the students did, in 4th grade about who was going to get into which track in 7th or higher.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-5971282561026469972009-02-27T20:05:00.000-08:002009-02-27T20:05:00.000-08:00"Or is it that instruction is getting poorer and p..."Or is it that instruction is getting poorer and poorer so the tracking is holding back those who we believe wouldn't have been held back a generation ago?"<BR/><BR/>I wouldn't put it quite that way.<BR/><BR/>Full-inclusion requires lower expectations and a different way of looking at education. This doesn't fit in with the world of tracking that will happen. Schools can't pump kids merrily along and then toss them into the big filter in high school. <BR/><BR/>Things are different now. There are lower expectations. Parents have to do more. My parents didn't help with my work at all.SteveHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956560674752399562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-83252842008876577462009-02-27T19:54:00.000-08:002009-02-27T19:54:00.000-08:00"How do you square the circle of differentiated in..."How do you square the circle of differentiated instruction is bad but separating out by skill is too?"<BR/><BR/>When I was growing up, there was no tracking in K-6. Almost. The lowest ability kids went somewhere else (perhaps out of district) for specialized help, and the rest were taught the same stuff. If you didn't meet grade-level expectations, you ran the risk of summer school or being held back a year. The schools started to track in seventh grade, which is still done in our schools, but to a lesser extent.<BR/><BR/>Tracking has, and always will, begin to happen by seventh grade. Even in our full-inclusion school, they realize that by seventh grade they have to separate kids in math and foreign language. You have to provide a path to the AP calculus track and a path to the second year of language in high school.<BR/><BR/>The new problems have to do with full inclusion in K-6. Our schools try very hard not to send kids out of district. There is a much wider range of abilities in our classrooms than there were when I was growing up. Many parents love (!) this idea, and some move to our town specifically for this reason. But it doesn't come without a price.<BR/><BR/>So, the issue now is not full-inclusion good; tracking, bad. It's all integrated into one classroom for K-6. Our state spends zero dollars on TAG or GATE education. The only way you can do this is to redefine education. Facts become mere and skills become rote. Enrichment takes the place of acceleration. It can work because they say it can work. By definition. (At least until seventh grade.) With such a wide range of abilities, differentition can seem more like tracking. At our schools, however, differentiation means that the more able kids have to either go to a private school (20 - 25% of the kids in our town), or get the extra help at home or with a tutor.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Ultimately, tracking (real separation and acceleration of material) will happen. I think that there were and still are the same problems about how this done, whether by test or teacher recommendation. In seventh grade (many years ago) I got placed into one of two accelerated classes. I'm sure the decision was based on much more than grades, and I'm sure it was unfair to a number of students.<BR/><BR/>I fall into the camp that says the decision should ultimately be up to the kids and their parents. However, I want schools to deal honestly with the conflict between full inclusion in K-6 and tracking starting in seventh grade. Their differentiation is not getting the job done. All they have to do is ask the parents. In effect, schools have to square the idea that full inclusion is so perfect in K-6, but tracking in 7-12 is also just fine. Something is happening here and many parents at KTM know what it is.SteveHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03956560674752399562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-25958266875180337052009-02-27T19:45:00.000-08:002009-02-27T19:45:00.000-08:00---Doors are closed in sixth grade by schools and ...---Doors are closed in sixth grade by schools and teachers who may not understand or even like math<BR/><BR/>Wait, Steve, do you think this is NEW? This is what happened to everyone else who ever went to school, too. <BR/><BR/>In reality, the doors closed EARLIER than that. The doors closed before 4th grade at the latest. That is what you see if you just look at what happens to readers. Can't read well enough by 4th grade? it's over; the doors to college are closed.<BR/><BR/>Don't know your times tables by 4th grade? Can't add without your fingers? NOTHING is going to help you catch up. You can't remediate enough material to be on pace with the alg-in-8th anyway.<BR/><BR/>the classrooms bifurcate on those lines early, because either instruction has almost never mattered or matters little compared to home as long as home provides the basics for education through 4th grade.<BR/><BR/>So I guess there's at least one thing to be optimistic about: it used to be taken for granted that the doors closed by 6th grade. Now we think that's wrong. Interesting improvement.<BR/><BR/>So are we just insistent that our kids not experience what we did? Do we really think this is worse than what happened to us? Does it seem to matter more now that our kid fell off the math wagon early? Is it that our demands of teaching are now higher than they were? Or is it that instruction is getting poorer and poorer so the tracking is holding back those who we believe wouldn't have been held back a generation ago?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-48227541389508374552009-02-27T19:21:00.000-08:002009-02-27T19:21:00.000-08:00okay, other comments arrived after I wrote mine bu...okay, other comments arrived after I wrote mine but before it posted...<BR/><BR/>having read the rest above, the answer is:<BR/>yes, the teachers have all of the discretion and power over the student's future because their recommendations moreso than any other criteria are the basis by which our kids' education moves forward. It affects which classes they can take, which school they'll get to attend, etc.<BR/><BR/>And teachers have all this power probably because those schools don't trust the grades they give out to kids--either due to inflation or deflation, who knows which--so they just go with teacher recs. And even if they did something reasonable like a placement test, earlier teachers have been systematically un-teaching or mis-teaching enough material, whether by design or not, so that only those kids whose parents were in the know and sought outside remediation were able to overcome that massive gaps in knowledge.<BR/><BR/>Have I got it all down?<BR/><BR/>We used to trust teachers. We used to trust their intellect and their judgment. Now big swathes of folks don't. <BR/><BR/>And we're in that swath. We might have to pay lip service to having how hard teachers work, what saints they are, but largely, we don't trust them as a class anymore, and we think that those who do are the ones whose kids are getting left behind.<BR/><BR/>Teachers feel that distrust and respond by circling wagons, making parents the enemy, using edujargon, etc. Everything to keep the distrusting from getting any real evidence to use against them. <BR/><BR/>So, the issues of tracking and placement are really just strategems in this war for control.<BR/><BR/>But there's no way to salvage the trust without changing who the teachers are, and what they have been taught. So there's no peace accord in the future; all that's left is one side needs to win control. And winning here means: they do what we tell them to do? Short of that, really, what are we fighting for?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7691251033406320222.post-19006891642948111772009-02-27T18:57:00.000-08:002009-02-27T18:57:00.000-08:00Tracking refers to separating out kids into differ...Tracking refers to separating out kids into different classrooms by some metric, be it IQ or aptitude or whatever you want to call it. At least, that is what tracking used to mean when it was considered positive. In the 40s and 50, tracking wasn't just "a math track" or "a history track". You were either in the fast camp, the normal camp, or the slow camp: bright kids got A-level courses in math and reading and history, the middle got none, the low end were in the slow versions for all of the above. There was no "honors English" student who was also in normal math.<BR/><BR/>When people complain of tracking now, it seems to be on a much finer scale: we're complaining that there is a math track that we couldn't get our kid into, rather than our kid has been excluded from all opportunities for advanced courses, etc.<BR/><BR/>Still, it's hard to understand the schizophrenic school that somehow manages to track kids and do full-classroom inclusion at the same time. Aren't we on this blog constantly complaining at full inclusion, differentiated instruction, etc.? How do you square the circle of differentiated instruction is bad but separating out by skill is too?<BR/><BR/>Or is the issue simply that placement is determined by teachers? I mean, really, does it all boil down to that--there isn't any other quantitative or objective measure by which kids are sorted into the fine grained tracks?<BR/><BR/>In my day, we had placement tests. Piece of cake. The obvious solution. Is the issue that placement tests are disallowed? Does this whole discussion go back to the issue of how to stop the teacher from having so much control over the student's outcomes?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com