After spending more than an hour discussing a plan for helping top math students perform even better, the Evanston/Skokie District 65 School Board paused this week to consider whether it would be better to expend that effort on aiding struggling students.
The question arose while considering a plan from the district’s math team to combine Math 6 and Math 7 into a single “compacted” course, rather than having the bright students skip Math 6 altogether.
The change would involve adding an additional $91,600 to the budget.
For years, parents of bright students have lobbied the board for additional acceleration for their “bored” students in order that these students might move more easily into Honors and Advance Placement classes when they reach the high school.
Board member Candance Chow noted that students in other districts, such as Oak Park, have provided for such acceleration opportunities.
But member Sunith Kartha said that the board has been criticized for its inability to narrow the achievement gap between black and white students and that the money might be better spent hiring math specialists to help the struggling students.
“We are spending a lot of time and resources on students who are already successful,” she declared.
The plan, presented by the district’s STEM director, Matsuo Marti, was to create a compacted Math 6/7 course that would be taken by high-achieving sixth graders in the three middle schools–Chute, Haven, and Nichols– while the team continues to work on the logistics of offering the course to magnet school students at King Arts and Bessie Rhodes schools.
The change, he said, would enable the students to deal more effectively with the Common Core State Standards in math education. Skipping Math 6 entirely, he said, would mean that students would miss some of the material covered by the standards.
Superintendent Paul Goren said the objective would be to place students where they can take maximum advantage of the opportunities presented at Evanston Township High School, but not to put struggling students in classes where they would be unable to succeed.
The plan was described by one board member as “tracking,” which the board has rejected as a contributor to the achievement gap.
In his cover memo to the board, Marti noted that the math team recognized that its proposal would have a “limited impact” on increasing achievement from “under-represented groups,” yet it would allow the team to focus its attention on improving the performance of those groups as well.
Because this meeting was the board’s monthly “working meeting” for discussing issues, any formal action on approving the plan would be deferred to a subsequent meeting.
It is apparent that some
It is apparent that some people on D65 school board do not have a grasp of the best way of using a limited amount of money. This sounded like an one year 90k iffy experiment.
As far as helping under-achieving students, there is little chance that will ever happen without training parents or adult guardians to start doing their jobs. D65 staff acting as replacement parents will have some limited successes they can talk about.
Achievement gap
While I understand the need for parents and guardians to be better prepared to help students at home, asking them to “start doing their job” is un-called for and a bit condescending. I work in many schools in the area with significant poverty, violence, unemployment and general lack of opportunities, and while it is true that some parents and guardians could do more, there are many situations in which parents -or a single parent- are working two jobs just to make ends meet with zero extras. Many want to help their students at home, but they don’t have enough time, not to mention the education or money -for proper healthcare, nutrition, supplies, tutoring, etc- to help in a meaningful way. In sum, it is far more complicated than just “start doing their jobs”, and we as compassionate society should help one another, through personal effort or by supporting school districts in theirs.
I do not believe that being
I do not believe that being poor is a good excuse for failing their children There is extra help out there, free lunch, free healthcare, free school supplies, free tutoring. If this is the case, there is a very good chance that their kids are not going to succeed and will end up being in the same hole as their parents.
Maybe some of our high-paid teachers can put in an extra unpaid hour a day to help the under-achieving students to pull up their grades. If these kids can get past 1 or 2 things, maybe they can soar upward on their own.
Every child, every day,
Every child, every day, whatever it takes. That includes students who are ready for advanced math."
Exactly right
If the district leadership cannot abide by its own motto, either change the motto… or change the district leadership.
Narrow the gap by bringing down the top?
Speaking of doing the math, it seems on the basis of this report like the board believes they can narrow the gap between high and low by bringing the high closer to the bottom. A comment like “We are spending a lot of time and resources on students who are already successful” implies there’s a limit to a child’s education. If they meet the standards, that’s good enough, why invest more in them? And that’s just sad, particularly coming from a board member.
A little context…
I love Evanston Now but I think this summary of the proposal and meeting leaves out some important information. The proposal put forth by the district is to replace the existing "grade-skipping" model with this new "compacted" model. Teachers (and research) suggest that grade-skipping isn't the best approach, so the district was trying to figure out how to improve this existing program and also how to make it more transparent.
This is not an attempt to help these students "perform even better" – they are already working above grade level and must be exceeding all standards to even be considered for math acceleration. It is designed to place them more appropriately in math. It isn't a perfect proposal, but it is a start at something that might better serve D65 students who have strong math skills and who have a strong interest in math.
It does not represent "additional acceleration" but a (hopefully) improved program to replace the program that is already in place. This math acceleration program is the only D65 program available in any subject for students who are working above grade level, so I take issue with Ms. Kartha's assertion that we are spending "a lot of resources" on this group of kids.
The achievement gap is a pervasive and stubborn problem in our district. However, it doesn't just appear out of nowhere in middle school. We need to address this problem in the early elementary grades. According to the plans presented at the meeting, a plan for addressing some aspects of the achievement gap in K-5 is next on the docket for the D65 STEM team. This is essential for our district and I look forward to hearing their plans.
A lot of resources
This year, there are 108 8th graders enrolled in Geometry. So, to support these 108 children on this track, we spend money on transportation, tuition at ETHS, staff costs and materials at D65. Next year, according to this proposal, we will spend up to $95K additionally to create a better pathway to Geometry for current 5th graders. I am guessing the whole Geometry track will cost about $150K for these 108 (just this year’s number…it fluctuates some students. $1400 per student.
I wish that money was invested in professional learning that could benefit EVERY student.
Most don’t go to the high school for Geometry
Geometry is offered by highly-trained teachers at the middle schools. Most middle school students who take Geometry stay at the middle school for that class.
While each child's needs are different, the middle school program is considered by many to be a superior experience for 8th graders — two periods devoted to geometry, more opportunity to visit the teacher before and after school, as well as during the school day, and more involved, rigorous teaching that benefits younger students.
I had one child take Geometry at the middle school and one at the high school. The middle school experience was far superior in every way, including how much the student learned. It also shows in their progress in math classes in later years.
This proposal talks about combining Math 6 and Math 7 so that no content is skipped which is the approach now. Skipping a year of math content is not good. In fact, covering what had been two years of content in one year could help some kids who might not otherwise advance in math to make that move because the doubts as to whether the child could "make it" when skipping a year of math would be considerably reduced.
The combined class could help more kids of all races advance in math and that sounds very positive to me.
Not correct
You are using the number of students from one grade and the expenditure number for the entire program (multiple grades). This yields an incorrect total of money spent per student.
Nagging issues.
Concerning the education of our students in Evanston and Skokie, from the perspective of doing the math as a taxpayer who reads the news that certain students are not learning or meeting the standards of the Tavistock Institute and the standards that have been politically set by testing.
How will this $91K be allocated to the special needs of the outstanding students in math. Would it be the salary of an educator that would be hired to administer the the needs of what percentage of students that would be affectied.
Further, as for lobbying, this sounds like a political move for the majority of special interest parents that are concerned that their kids are bored. It is totally disheartening that some parents are frustated that their kids are not being motivated to read, just as the taxpayers see their taxes increase in the areas of education or miseducation.
There is no equality in the system that is set up in Evanston. The charts are based on racial standards. if there are students in the low categories that are smart but are not being recognized that they need extra help in math, then yes, help them.
The students that are ready for a challenge that are not being recognized could very easily be handled by the parents in a different way by funding their additional income a more constructive way to alleviate the boring, but not in the boardroom. Perhaps have these students help those that need help in a community service forum. Kids helping each other.
D65 smart kids getting help or struggling kids
It is only fair to help both. Smart kids study just as hard or more than struggling kids who don’t have a learning disabilities.
What if compaction were at grade 9?
What if all students followed the Algebra path in middle school, then at grade 9, some kids studied Geometry for two semesters, and those for whom it is appropriate, completed Geometry in semester 1 and then Algebra 2 in semester 2? Why have we assumed that Math 6 and 7 are the best courses to compact?
Moving compaction to the HS means less disruption in the middle schools, honors teacher concerns about segregated classrooms and costs less. Since the high school is a single location with larger enrollment, it seems as if it might be logistically easier and cheaper to implement compaction there. Plus, the students will be a little older. Time to identify late bloomers and/or children who are truly passionate about math.