Access and Equity Policy: What To Do Next?

DaveSchmidt said:
Establishment of an open enrollment period of several weeks early in the school year similar to the “add-drop” period we now have on university campuses. This will allow students to attend classes at their chosen level, but to have the flexibility to move up or down levels to find the best fit.
In college, the flexibility to drop and add courses is restricted when times conflict or a class is closed because the room is filled. Also, weeks to decide is less of a bite out of a semester than it would be out of a quarter. Given that middle and high schools face scheduling challenges that colleges do not, any ideas on what would need to happen to make Ms. Freedson's suggestion workable?

Core classes are yearlong and while grades are quarterly the classes do not change. The open access policy presents challenges and that is why having a detailed discussion is crucial and I'm so glad Peggy Freedson lays things out so clearly to start that discussion

mod said:

Core classes are yearlong and while grades are quarterly the classes do not change.

The potential effect on grading in the first marking period, if a student misses weeks of a class's graded work, was what I had in mind.

DaveSchmidt said:

mod said:

Core classes are yearlong and while grades are quarterly the classes do not change.

The potential effect on grading in the first marking period, if a student misses weeks of a class's graded work, was what I had in mind.

Off the top - the work and grades in the current class could be used in some way. Also I have found that first quarters grades because of so much time off in the beginning of the year and review work are often not linked to very many assignments/tests.

Presumably there would need to be enough, though, to help a student gauge what kind of fit the level was.

FWIW: Harvard does a one-week long "shopping" period for course registration.

From https://college.harvard.edu/frequently-asked-questions

Q: Must I register for courses before they begin?

A: No. You will enjoy a week-long “shopping” period at the start of each semester during which you visit classes and compare curricular choices before registering for classes.

From https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/hear-our-students/student-blogs/shopping-week

Shopping week this semester lasted from Monday until Friday. During shopping week, students are able to attend any class, leave any class in the middle to shop another class, and shop six or seven classes but only end up taking four or five. Unlike most schools, Harvard doesn’t require students to register for classes before they’ve actually spent a week getting to know a class.

Thanks, sprout. The hitch I see is that Harvard then leaves it to the students to make their schedules work, and doesn't have to make all the pieces fit the way a middle school or high school does.

I'm sure the technology exist for students to do it themselves, fulfill all criteria, put themselves on waitlists, etc., and finalize.

Cost is likely a hinderance... but if it really works, it could free up people who spend months on schedules to focus on other priorities.

Also if the course Syllabii were all online and easily accessible with transparency as to pacing, etc. then comparisons could be made ahead of choice. The more good information available to students and parents in the beginning the less likely the need for late adjustments

Agreed. The current leveling regulations seemed more about what the student should be like to enroll in each level of classes, rather than what the course expectations were. Seemed backwards to me.

For example, defining Level 2 students as those who didn't always complete their homework/projects, seemed to condone teachers' low expectations of students in these levels.

sprout said:
I'm sure the technology exist for students to do it themselves, fulfill all criteria, put themselves on waitlists, etc., and finalize.

Quick google search shows that PowerSchool has a PowerScheduler... and if I'm reading correctly in my skimming of the documentation, it could allow students to self-enroll within allowable constraints.

sprout said:
I'm sure the technology exist for students to do it themselves, fulfill all criteria, put themselves on waitlists, etc., and finalize.
Cost is likely a hinderance... but if it really works, it could free up people who spend months on schedules to focus on other priorities.

Technology aside, the demand for core courses at various levels vs. the number of available classes seems like a much tighter market, so speak, and a much tricker match than at a college. College skeds, as I recall, were relatively loose; if I couldn't get the class I needed at 8, chances were good I had plenty of gaps in the day to squeeze it in at another time.

And looking at it from the school's standpoint, I assume CHS has to plan pretty carefully to assign enough teachers to enough classes at various levels based on preknown student placements. How nimbly could administrators adjust those assignments to accommodate the shuffling of placements after a couple of weeks?

Maybe those obstacles (ETA: a.k.a allowable constraints) are overstated. You thinking that?

DaveSchmidt said:

Technology aside, the demand for core courses at various levels vs. the number of available classes seems like a much tighter market, so speak, and a much trickier match than at a college. College skeds, as I recall, were relatively loose; if I couldn't get the class I needed at 8, chances were I had plenty of gaps in the day to squeeze it in at another time.

And looking at it from the school's standpoint, I assume CHS has to plan pretty carefully to assign enough teachers to enough classes at various levels based on predetermined student placements. How nimbly could administrators adjust those assignments to accommodate the shuffling of placements after a couple of weeks?

Maybe those obstacles are overstated. You thinking that?

There is already quite a bit (and somewhat chaotic) movement between levels in the system, even though it is tightly controlled, and supposed to be very limited. Last-minute changes to the scheduling matrix appear to occur.

I suspect that if you allow students to perform their own initial enrollment in the Spring (based on syllabi and info from previous students) then waitlists, near-empty classes, and 'open response' requests for course offerings, can initially inform the need for master schedule adjustments before the school year begins.

If students picked close to what they really want (which I think they would), then movement should be minimal during "shopping" week in the Fall, and hopefully not require any major changes in the scheduling system.

That said, if it happens that nearly everyone wants to drop a certain class, it would likely tell the administration that the teacher or the class is not meeting advertised expectations.

If students are given choices, they will factor in one thing no one has brought up yet: the teacher, or rather his/her rep. I certainly would take that into consideration.

Absolutely. Same goes for the parents who are advising the students.

That's kind of the point of my last sentence. When students register in the Spring, there shouldn't be a teacher yet assigned to the courses. If they leave the course in droves in the Fall, it indicates something about the teacher or course expectation differences that should be attended to.

Could we return to Freedson's excellent op-ed please, and the substance provided within? I really haven't seen anything like it from the other slates. In addition, despite the kerfluffle here about a particular elementary school's spending, as Jeff Bennett has pointed out, curriculum is actually an area where we can make improvements without spending more money--it's budget neutral. It's the how, not the adding more.

I'm also glad to see someone with curriculum expertise and educational credentials seeking membership on the school board. However, there must be something else going on here to make everyone so giddy (and that's really what it sounds like) about Ms. Freedson. We had a person with curriculum expertise and equally impressive education credentials on the Board, Mr. Bill Guadelli. Unless I'm mistaken, you Eastman supporters on this board all hated him. My conclusion is that it must not be Ms. Freedson's educational credentials but something else about her beliefs or ideology that appeals to this constituency. I wonder what that could be?

Are you BillG? Because there's something about your posting style that's reminding me of him.

My sense is that BillG wants to talk about long-range dreams like full differentiation via self-paced customized learning IT solutions that are years from being possible for us (at least that is what I remember him for, when he used the long term future of full customization as an argument about doing anything about G&T issues for the time being).

On the other hand, Freedson is talking about very concrete things that we can and should do now.

Since Guadelli isn't running, I don't have to think about him. I do expect to vote for Freedson, unless I learn something unexpected when I finally watch the debate videos. She is very impressive, and very approachable.

Johngillam189 said:
I'm also glad to see someone with curriculum expertise and educational credentials seeking membership on the school board. However, there must be something else going on here to make everyone so giddy (and that's really what it sounds like) about Ms. Freedson. We had a person with curriculum expertise and equally impressive education credentials on the Board, Mr. Bill Guadelli. Unless I'm mistaken, you Eastman supporters on this board all hated him. My conclusion is that it must not be Ms. Freedson's educational credentials but something else about her beliefs or ideology that appeals to this constituency. I wonder what that could be?

I really liked Bill Gaudelli at first and voted for him because he campaigned as a moderate. He also had those very appealling on the steps videos. But then, once he got on, he voted pretty ideologically, without looking at any data. Then, surprise, after 3 years, he decided not to run again because people caught on that what he said and what he did were different.

Freedson seems more like the real deal. She is actually doing teacher training, working with teachers, in schools. She seems humble about what schools can do.

Gaudelli turned out to be more of an ivory tower kind of guy, with little care about teachers day-to-day (or so it seems to me, and I watched him speak at Board meetings.)

sprout said:
Are you BillG? Because there's something about your posting style that's reminding me of him.

If not Bill G, then Steve Latz. Or perhaps even David Huemer congratulating himself for his "powerful and persuasive" etcetera.

(Which, for the record, I found weirdly self-defeating from someone who imagines he supports diversity.)

alp said:
I really liked Bill Gaudelli at first and voted for him because he campaigned as a moderate. He also had those very appealling on the steps videos. But then, once he got on, he voted pretty ideologically, without looking at any data. Then, surprise, after 3 years, he decided not to run again because people caught on that what he said and what he did were different.

Seems like that's a thing in this community.

Wonder why.

BillG had a long record of highly opinionated posts on the MOL Education thread. When he announced his candidacy, he argued that the MOL posts were not relevant to his candidacy. I still can't believe that some people fell for that.

Well , Bill is old news. In his goodbye interview at TAP he listed as his accomplishments deleveling the middle school and the International Baccaulaureate Program. Hmmm, well here we are and our board has just passed unanimously, an access and equity policy that turns the tired deleveling debate on it's ear and we have a highly qualified candidate who has laidout a detailed and substantive look at possible next steps . Why then are we talking about BillG?

Crazy.

mod said:
Well , Bill is old news. In his goodbye interview at TAP he listed as his accomplishments deleveling the middle school and the International Baccaulaureate Program. Hmmm, well here we are and our board has just passed unanimously, an access and equity policy that turns the tired deleveling debate on it's ear and we have a highly qualified candidate who has laidout a detailed and substantive look at possible next steps . Why then are we talking about BillG?
Crazy.

As much as I agree with most of what's been written here about Gaudelli, IMHO the deleveling of the MS was a step in the right direction.

Also, while I appreciate and agree with much of Freedson's specific proposals, I would hardly call it "a detailed and substantive look at possible next steps." Her proposal covers little of what the new policy promises. Still, it's better than the silence from other candidates--but it serves little purpose for her supporters to overstate the case. [This is coming from an undecided voter who's been paying attention to the issues.]

xavier67 said:

mod said:
Well , Bill is old news. In his goodbye interview at TAP he listed as his accomplishments deleveling the middle school and the International Baccaulaureate Program. Hmmm, well here we are and our board has just passed unanimously, an access and equity policy that turns the tired deleveling debate on it's ear and we have a highly qualified candidate who has laidout a detailed and substantive look at possible next steps . Why then are we talking about BillG?
Crazy.

As much as I agree with most of what's been written here about Gaudelli, IMHO the deleveling of the MS was a step in the right direction.
Also, while I appreciate and agree with much of Freedson's specific proposals, I would hardly call it "a detailed and substantive look at possible next steps." Her proposal covers little of what the new policy promises. Still, it's better than the silence from other candidates--but it serves little purpose for her supporters to overstate the case. [This is coming from an undecided voter who's been paying attention to the issues.]

Well I guess we have differing definitions of detailed and substantive.I honestly don't think I've overstated. It covers the logistics of opening choice up at the Middle school and High school and it discusses strengthening early education in specific ways to support the great promise of access and choice.

It's not as if I said it changes the world as we know it but It is refreshing to have a candidate write specific and practical proposals

I think she will enhance administration accountability to the board with regard to curriculum and best practices. Maybe personnel changes in administration + a Board with a teacher of teachers on it will enhance even in a little way, what is going on in the classroom.

Freedson's got my vote. Eastman and Pai, too. I like that they are behind giving a student his/her shot at a higher level if the student wants it. Now I want to hear what supports will be in place for students trying for a harder level. Is there a budget for more summer school, for example? There is no support in the world that would make up for student not showing up mentally and not doing the work. (Direct experience with this in my family!) But in the choose-your-own-level construct, student IS mentally there and has affirmatively chased the level s/he's in. Supports offered to such students wouldn't be wasted, I don't think.

mod said:

Well I guess we have differing definitions of detailed and substantive.I honestly don't think I've overstated. It covers the logistics of opening choice up at the Middle school and High school and it discusses strengthening early education in specific ways to support the great promise of access and choice.

It's not as if I said it changes the world as we know it but It is refreshing to have a candidate write specific and practical proposals

We can certainly agree on this.

I wasn't able to read until the end of Freedson's essay, actually. So maybe it's brilliant and contains what people are looking for in a board member. I found it rather dull, myself, as edu-speak often is. I'm still skeptical of why someone who cares deeply about early childhood education would run with Eastman and Pai. I saw a friend's video tape of Mr. Eastman's graduation speech at Seth Boyden last year. Was anyone there? They showed it to me because they were incredulous that this man is president of the school board, and that he's running again. It is rather startling. "Children: you won't remember this day, unless you DO remember this day. My daughter graduated here, and she doesn't remember this day! But it's a grand day!"--or some rambling incoherent statement like that. What kind of school board president gives a 5th graduation speech at one of our elementary schools and gives it not a whit of thought until he opens his mouth in front of the graduating class and their families?

Did anyone post anything about that when it happened? I know. I'm thread wandering. But his record as School Board President is not impressive, to say the least.

Johngillam189 said:
I wasn't able to read until the end of Freedson's essay, actually. So maybe it's brilliant and contains what people are looking for in a board member. I found it rather dull, myself, as edu-speak often is. I'm still skeptical of why someone who cares deeply about early childhood education would run with Eastman and Pai. I saw a friend's video tape of Mr. Eastman's graduation speech at Seth Boyden last year. Was anyone there? They showed it to me because they were incredulous that this man is president of the school board, and that he's running again. It is rather startling. "Children: you won't remember this day, unless you DO remember this day. My daughter graduated here, and she doesn't remember this day! But it's a grand day!"--or some rambling incoherent statement like that. What kind of school board president gives a 5th graduation speech at one of our elementary schools and gives it not a whit of thought until he opens his mouth in front of the graduating class and their families?
Did anyone post anything about that when it happened? I know. I'm thread wandering. But his record as School Board President is not impressive, to say the least.

Again, I write this as an undecided voter: you are doing the candidates you support no favor by posting such mean-spirited and puerile attack on other candidates.

Oh JG or should that be SL or DH? You are very transparent in your partisan slams and apparently you may have been absent when your teachers taught persuasive writing. You need to provide some facts to back up a statement such as "but his record as school board president is not impressive to say the least ".

Here are the facts: Under Mr. Eastman's leadership (since Jan. 2015) the board has conducted a Superintendent search and hired Dr. Ramos in a unanimous board decision, settled a contract with SOMEA, and passed an Access and Equity policy , based on his and Ms. Pai's 2012 platform-again by unanimous decision.

Seems pretty impressive to me.