[mpls] school board candidates

[Socialist2001 at cs.com]

In a message dated 10/1/2004 10:16:41 AM Central Daylight Time, 
snyde043 at tc.umn.edu writes:

<< ...what happens to the kids who are coming into the school system 
unprepared to learn and cannot keep up with the same academic track as other 
students?>>
 
[Doug Mann] <<What kids are you talking about? Who are the kids who aren't 
prepared to learn, can't keep up, in your estimation? (What percentage of the 
overall student population? Of the major racial subgroups? Of those eligible for 
free and reduced price lunch?)>>
 
[Mark Snyder] << I would say the kids who are demonstrating that they're not 
getting the material.>> 

[Doug Mann] In my opinion, a teacher should attempt to figure out why 
individual students are not getting the material. That involves a process of 
gathering and organizing data in a systematic way, assessing strengths and weaknesses, 
and developing a plan with measurable goals and timelines, specific 
interventions and expected outcomes. 

Methods used to gather and organize information in a systematic way include 
active observation (including the collection and recording of data in a 
systematic way), paper-and-pencil tests / quizzes, flash cards.

Reading is a critical skill that K-3 teachers should know how to teach and 
should learn how to teach well as quickly as possible. As I recall, my child 
development textbook stated that a "normal" 5 year old, that is, over 90% of 5 
year olds have the cognitive ability to learn how to read.

There are also huge variations in genetically programmed neurological and 
motor development, such as with the acquisition of fine motor control necessary 
to easily track a line of print. About 90% of children acquire that ability 
somewhere between the ages of 4 and 9 (on average, girls mature more quickly in 
this area). Overall, genetically programmed learning abilities narrow 
considerably as students progress from grades K to 3.    

Students in a given first grade classroom are going to be all over the map in 
terms of what they already know and can do when it comes to reading. Some 
students can already read because they had effective reading instruction in 
Kindergarten or at home, and others are starting from scratch and may have a very 
limited "sight vocabulary" and recognize only about a dozen letters (most 
children can learn more than that in a half-day kindergarten class). Reading 
instruction doesn't have to be delayed for some or watered down for the whole class 
if the teacher presents the material in a certain order, with the approaches 
necessary to address the knowledge and skill deficits of particular students.  

It has been estimated that about 20% of the population has some kind of  
"Specific reading disorder." Specialized, one-on-one instruction is necessary for 
about 2% of the population with more severe disorders. A teacher should know 
something about SRDs (Specific Reading Disorders) and approaches that can 
benefit most students and adequately address the needs of most students with SRDs.

In a mixed-ability class of 6 year old children who speak English as the 
native language, it should be possible for most to master critical reading skills, 
provided the teacher has learned how to teach reading skill and uses "best 
practices." (generally the most effective and efficient instructional methods 
and approaches)

I favor mainstreaming special Ed and English Language Learners. However, I 
also see the need for separate classes in language arts and other subject areas 
for students who speak Spanish, Somali and other languages and do not speak 
English (or don't speak it well enough), until they are proficient enough in 
English to function well in a classroom where English is the language of 
instruction. I also favor separate classes, as a last resort, for students with 
special needs that cannot be effectively addressed by a particular regular Ed 
teacher.      

[Mark Snyder] I have no idea what percentage of students that would be or 
what racial
 subgroup they might represent or whether they're eligible for a free or 
reduced price lunch. I don't care about any of those things because I'm not 
obsessed with the idea that the MPS is racist or discriminates by class.

[Doug Mann] A school board member should know a great deal about the learning 
gap that exists between categories of students identified by race and 
eligibility for free and reduced price lunch. Closing those learning gaps and 
boosting student achievement are the district's strategic goals. A strategic goal is 
the goal to which all other goals are subordinated.  

[Mark Snyder] What matters to me is that the students who need a slower pace 
or who need extra help or attention will get it. As someone who occasionally 
needed that as a student due to my hearing loss, I can speak from experience 
that you can feel just as inadequate as part of a mixed-ability classroom where 
you don't know what's going on as you can from being part of a "low-ability" 
group.

[Doug Mann] I believe that most students can handle a "high-ability" 
curriculum. Some need extra help and special attention. And students need competent 
teachers, the more competent the better. In my opinion, a prerequisite for 
"untracking," i.e., phasing out ability-grouping, is to distribute probationary 
teachers evenly throughout the district's schools and cut the teacher turnover 
rate in order to reduce the exposure of students to inexperienced teachers.      
 
  
[Doug Mann] <<In schools where students are assigned to separate classrooms 
for reading instruction according to "ability" or achievement, who is going to 
be better prepared to learn? A) students who learn the higher-order reading 
skills B) students in the not-yet-ready to learn how to read class.>>
 
[Mark Snyder] <<If this is what's happening, that seems to be an argument for 
MORE ability-based grouping, not eliminating it.
 
Perhaps Mike Atherton was onto something when he suggested we get rid of the 
grade-progression system and replace with progression upon demonstrating 
mastery of required skills or subjects. I think I'm remembering that right. If not, 
I hope he will chime in and correct me. >>

[Doug Mann] In my opinion, the Minneapolis school district already does about 
as much ability-grouping as the law allows. And the district is not in 
compliance with Title VI of the Civil Right Act of 1964 in relation to monitoring 
the progress of K-3 students assigned to low, medium and high-ability classrooms 
for reading instruction and other subject areas, in my opinion. See "Title VI 
requires evaluation of ability grouping practices." 
http://educationright.com/id404.htm

In my opinion, the best practice is to keep K-3 students with the same 
teacher for the bulk of the day. K-3 teachers need to know all of their students as 
well as possible because teaching K-3 students what K-3 students are expected 
to learn requires complex, individualized planning and a lot of flexibility, 
especially if you are to give them all a "college-bound" education.  That is 
why it is impractical to have the kind of division of labor and specialization 
for K-3 students that Michael Atherton proposed in an Email exchange on this 
list 2-3 years ago.

-Doug Mann, King Field
write-in "Doug Mann" for school board
www.educationright.com
-