I found your hastily written op-ed to be alarmist and offensive. First it makes a mockery of all previous data presentations. The public has been told about the data over and over again. There are discrepancies, we all know this. Most of us have moved on - not let us distract ourselves. The debate and the real issues are much deeper than third hand data analysis.
Now getting to the "meat" of the issue - delevling. The author again misrepresents the problem. This should not be a battle between the high level students and the remainder. How dare Ms. Sender seemingly pit students and families against each other. Assumptions and threats (of failure) is what I find most offensive. This is not the way we ALL move forward. I personally do not have strong opinions about whether to delevel or not. I see both sides of the issue - both have pros and cons. What I do have a strong opinion about is that everyone in this school system needs more rigor - needs a higher academic expectation to be held to. The district's new plan for IB is an interesting one and I encourage all of us to go into Wednesday's meeting and subsequent meetings ready to listen, to ask questions, to engage in debate and then make determinations about its feasibility and impact. I think part of the reason that many are turned off of school board politics is because it becomes about the individual student (each parent with their own ax to grind). For once let's make it about ALL of our students.

If all our students means dumping all students in together and that's fine with you then so be it. I'm not only speaking of my child, I'm speaking of well over 100 seventh graders in this district who scored very high on NJASK, were in high levels 3 and 4, and now have no where to go but down. How's that for hastily written, back off Mack.

Lori, you accurately describe the consequences of deleveling. Either more kids fail or academic standards become watered down, one or the other is inevitable given the district's current resources and systems. The third option is, of course, the reality distorting option that has all level 2 kids somehow magically rise to the occasion next year. Good luck with that (also, there's no Easter Bunny). Who will the delevelers blame next year when more (not less) level 2 kids are failing, or more (not less) level 3 and 4 kids are in private school? Deleveling is a political solution to an academic problem. It is politically self-serving, and lacks the courage to be honest about what's required to actually raise standards for all.

In all honesty, it's not the pace or degree of change, nor the complexity of the issue, that keeps most parents from engaging in this discussion. It's the back and forth like you see here, where, indeed, parents seem pitted against each other. We can't even agree on what the educational goals of the district are and whether there's a problem meeting those goals for all students.

I agree Sean there is a nastiness to the debate. The BOE seems to appreciate this, rising above the fray; better to let us down in the streets deal with it and negate each other out with these "personal" comments. And while we're down here fighting it out, they're simply moving on with their agenda.

But still, there is some clarity behind this debate. Either you're worried about the high achieving kids or not. I do speak for this segment of the population which frankly is never going to be the majority in this town, so it does sound like we're outnumbered, because we are. But still, we do have lots of kids who are high achieving level 3 and 4's so the debate can get lively. It's just now we feel the need to speak out because of all these changes, likewise the vast majority of the middle and lower level parents are eager for change. The BOE in their progressive ideology have latched onto an issue which the majority agrees with. Really, why wouldn't I want my level 2 student to be in a class with your level 4 child? Duh!! But simply blindly trusting the BOE with their hurried approach of deleveling next year's 8th grade in mostly all subjects, is not the answer.
Why get rid of the honors classes in this district? Why such broad strokes? You and everyone will be affected by this, how many Upper West Siders will be buying your home when this gets out.

My kids are not yet in middle school and I am trying to learn about this issue. Being new to this, I can say that the tone of the debate is certainly off-putting. Lori, my children are not high performers. I simply want them to be in place where they are learning. I don't need them to be in a class with your level 4 child, as you suggest. ("Really, why wouldn't I want my level 2 student to be in a class with your level 4 child? Duh!!"). Is this what this is about? Keeping those level 2 kids away from the brilliant level 4 kids? And of course the level 2 parents are just pushing for their child to get a seat next to your gifted child? And we are worried about appealing to Upper West Side home buyers who, of course, don't want their kid to have to rub shoulders with level 2 kids either?

I am sure that there are educational arguments to be made here, but they are really overshadowed by the nasty tone and elitism.

Finally, we're getting to the crux of the matter. I'm sorry your children are not high performers, but whether or not you don't "need them to be in a class with your level 4 child," the district is putting them together. We parents of level 4 students have no choice. And how would you feel if the tables were reversed? All I'm asking is for you to not think of my child as gifted and entitled, just needing work at their level. The BOE is happy having you call me elitist. It suits their purposes. You are their pawn.

Hey just thought of a great new bumper sticker:

"My child would be an honors student at South Orange Middle School, if they had them."

Lori, I am sure that many parents of high-performing students have one very good reason for being opposed to de-leveling. I would think that they want their children to be challenged and to perform at the best of their abilities. That is what we all want. I don't blame you for wanting what you believe is best for your child.

However, your tone and many of your words are simply nasty and offensive. You are "sorry" that my children aren't high performers? Why? They do grade-level work, are curious and happy, and are kind to their friends. I'm pretty happy with them, thank you very much.

It's a shame that what might be a perfectly good argument is covered over with this dripping elitism (no, I'm not dying to have my kid sit next to yours, Duh!!, I don't really care what the upper west side buyers think, I'm not a pawn, and I'm quite delighted with my children -- no 'sorries' necessary) and shouts of "back off." You actually have made a pretty good case against de-leveling but not for the reasons you might think. If you are a typical parent of a "gifted" child and if those children are as elitist, nasty, and aggressive as what you have displayed here, I might want them kept in a separate classroom too.

Annie don't you see this lightening rod approach is to get your attention? Don't shoot the messenger. And just for the record, my dear, you called me nasty, elitist, aggressive and offensive. So much for quality of tone.

Lori, I have not yet formed an opinion on the issue, so no lightening rod for me. I just came here for information on the subject. I will continue to look. I can only believe that other people have presented this side of the issue in a way that is more clear-headed and less combative.

Anne, you can try MOL (Maplewood Online), you'll see me there but you can fast forward to others. Just Google it and then go to message board and push education. It's all there.

anne it is as simple as this .lets say there are three reading groups A,B,andC
A being the more advanced and C being not so advanced.children grouped by their present abilites.A group can read Shakespeare and C group can read on the dr seuss level
.now we move C group kids in with A group kids and visa versa .who wins?
nobody! C group gets further behind because they can't do the work or A group either gets held back waiting for C group to catch up .

Murray, that's a perfectly fine argument that makes sense. I was just stunned at how this particular person presented the issue here. I hope that her attitude is not typical as that would reveal an ugly underside to this debate that I don't want to believe is festering just beneath the surface of our community. I will continue to look for information and try to become informed on the issue. Thank you for your post; it's helpful and makes sense.

it's not

Thanks so much Murray. That is a relief to hear and I believe it. I will continue to look into this with an open mind, but certainly your post is simple and makes sense.

the only ugly underside of the issue is that it has been given Racially divisive over tones. it seems the counting of black and white students in the A group is more white than black,and the counting of black and white students in the C group is more black than white.some have choosen to blame this statistic on Racism.although these same people never choose to look at the racial ratio of discipline problems reported ,or disruptive students reported ,or racial breakdowns of school sponcered sports teams and host of many other factors that lead to student performance results. most students that have been in the school system for a long time, all had the same teachers, all read the same books, rich ,poor ,black ,white ,purple, green..a test does not know what color ,religion,race, you are . either you know the materail or not .you get out what you put in.
either your a good student or your not . not everyone goes to harvard.if i stand next to einstien i don't become one by osmoses.it simple no matter what level you are on , if you study ,do your work you will improve,but we all do that at different rates and speeds thats why there needs to be levels so everyone can learn at their speed and know one is held back.it's just plan simple logic.you must be able to walk before you can run.in other words walkers need to be with walkers until they can run
and runners need to aloud to run with thier respectful fellow runners

yes Murray, this debate has become so very racially charged but instead of the BOE focusing on the the real differences between the races that show up in early elementary school, they are throwing darts at the middle school (not to mention it's cheaper to do it this way).

But to keep that entirely mixed race honors class which sends the message to the entire school that race doesn't determine placement, no, that the BOE is taking away. That truly was a beautiful site to see-- the top class in 7th and 8th grade that was multiracial. But we're not hearing from the black parents in this town who are as disturbed as we are that things will be watered down. Waiting, waiting...

julie i think you missed my point. you took my example to Literally .maybe the joke was over your head

in addition white level 4 students are made to feel by some and looked upon as if they had some sort of advantage and/or special treatment as if they were part of some Conspiracy when the complete opposite is true.my child who has been a stright A and on high honor roll every grading period of his school career. he has skipped 7th grade math into 8th grdae math and agin in 8th grade to ninth grade math.he does not come from a wealthy or privileged family ,far from it. both parents work full time and always have. He is self motivated ,works his but off on school studies,BEHAVES in class ,is not disruptive.

he was used last year as a lab rat when the boe foolishly without any fore thought decided to de level the 7th grade
the results were a disaster . in most cases curriculum was either dumbed down or not taught. lower level children in higher level classes were disruptive and even sometimes violent as my son head was slamed in to a computor for no reason by a classmate that was moved into his class from a lower level class .although i am very open minded ,so anyone who benifited from the de leveled 7th grade i would love to hear from. it seems i can never get those specific
answers from the board of since they keep very little track of data.
my childs Scholastic achivements have never been ccelebrated by the towns or the schools.no awards,no metion in the papers,no metion in the schools ,no speial help,no special programs ,zero. maybe we need to stop putting the blame of the so called "the achiment gap".(we all know what that really means) on the system that seems to work other places (livingston,millburn,summit,etc)and start looking at the man in the mirror.

Julia, thank you. I had a chance to read your article on this topic on Patch, which is written in perfect English. I have read the article here, the comments, and now some of the comments on Patch. It is amazing to me that people arguing for educational excellence could have their writing so filled with spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and inconsistent usage, as well as sentence fragments and run-on sentences.

Lori referred me to her MOL comments. I found that she despaired of "getting a coherent discussion of let's say 'Downton Abbey,' or other British literary mentions among the 'class of all levels' next year in 8th grade language arts classes in our middle schools." Why, exactly, are the middle schoolers being encouraged to watch British television shows rather than read books? And her article here certainly could have used a proofreader before publication.

Again, I will be keeping an open mind as I look into this further. Julia, your article looks like a good place to start. But those parents who believe that their children will be "brought down" as a result of rubbing shoulders with level 2 students should, perhaps, look at the example that they themselves are currently setting.

Annie, for all those kids, my child included, who are watching TV, and probably lots of it, I'd be happy (as I believe most parents would) to see my child watching "Downton Abbey." And yes if a teacher were to discuss this in some literary form (comparing British writers, scenery, class structure, or simply mentioning this as a cultural phenomenon and pointing it out to students who wouldn't be aware of it, and then discussing it, what is wrong with that? I hope his Language Arts teacher watches this. By the way, the NY Times also wrote about this show recently, and that it is the latest water cooler conversation. Possibly branching out from Black Ops? Who knows it might get them interested in that period, and then read other similar types of books, like "Remains of the Day" (originally a novel, then a movie with Anthony Hopkins), Brideshead Revisited (novel first and then a movie). Very often a movie brings people to writings they wouldn't normally read. Not to mention Jane Austen (books and movies). However kids are exposed to these great works, from any direction, it is worthwhile.

(Marcia, I did not make any comment about anyone's writing. I believe my remarks were quite civil.)

Hi,

I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:

"keep eighth grade leveled"
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/keep-eighth-grade-leveled/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=system&utm_campaign=Send%2Bto%2BFriend

I really think this is an important cause, and I'd like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It's free and takes just a few seconds of your time.

Thanks!

i apologize to everyone for my Technically poorly written comments.they were written on the fly and i did not proof read them.however the thoughts and ideas stated still stand. i think they were clear in that regard.

This divisive discussion could disappear if we weren't so afraid of the word "ELITE" or "Elitism".

Eva Samo

Marcia, when parents arguing for higher standards are using sloppy English in their published work and whose best suggestion for a middle-school literary discussion is a television show that is all the rage at the water cooler, I think it is relevant. I am not putting down non-native speakers for a poor command of the language; I am taking issue with people who are native speakers and who are presumably educated but who just don't bother to proofread work intended for publication. This is a writer arguing for increased rigor in Language Arts? I simply pointed out a glaring irony. Lori Sender has written for the New York Times. Her command of the English language there is indeed flawless so the comparison to recent immigrants who struggle with the language is moot. Perhaps she thought that an article written for Patch was not worth the trouble. In any case, such sloppiness (not incompetence) simply shows a lack of regard for her audience. The fact that the piece is arguing for higher academic standards makes this kind of sloppiness particularly relevant.

Eva, could you please explain how this discussion would disappear if we were not afraid of the words "elite" and "elitism"? I will be very interested in hearing your answer.

Annie you are sadly missing the point, stop embarrassing yourself.

Lori I am on your side but be a little nicer. Lol

I know, it's just so tempting, but you're right.

Annie and Lori,
Just a reminder to stick to the issues and not focus on each other so much. Thanks!