Our children will all suffer for the sake of politics. I can't believe the board is rushing into this, despite the statistics which show no improvement in the studied areas. Horrible decision.

In response to an email queston: No proposals were made at the Dec. 19 meeting regarding the high school. Board President Beth Daugherty stated last night that high school recommendations would be made at the January Board of Education meeting on January 18.

For those keeping track of the academic placement shifts underway within our middle schools, for the 2010-2011 school year the BoE and Superintendent Osborne repeatedly discussed "LevelUp" for 7th grade -- or deleveling 7th grade -- as "modest changes". The proposal put forward last night, and outlined above, would amount to {IMHO} "high-stake shifts" within our middle schools.

It's not called out for emphasis in their proposal but wanted to underscore that if this plan is approved grades 6-7-8 would be implemented all as "grade level" classes, with some exceptions. Those exceptions include 6th and 7th grade math would continue with "Accelerated Math" where kids test out of a grade level of math and could take 7th grade math while in 6th grade and the rest of the class would be either "grade level" or "Honors". 8th grade math would keep "Accelerated" and three levels of "grade level" or "honors" or "advanced honors". And, 8th grade would add an "Accelerated Language Arts".

In effect, if approved, for September 2012, the middle schools would remove 10-12 levels, across three grades within the schools.

Keep in mind the one-year of data from LevelUp 7th grade (deleveling) signals grade inflation and a falling in NJASK scores among struggling students. These are signals for the wrong direction.

Without clear indication of success, let alone discussion of what worked/didn't with LevelUp, why would Osborne propose something so unfounded?

The superintendent, and hopefully the board, are gradually implementing changes to an unjustifiable tracking system that never should have been instituted in the first place. The idea that there has been "grade inflation" is an inference from facts, not a fact. There are other plausible explanations for the grade patterns. The system for evaluating and tracking students made no sense, and did great harm to many students in our district. The superintendent's proposal does include a layer of honors classes in the 8th grade in Math and Language Arts for the top 10 to 15 percent. That's a much lower percentage than the roughly 40 percent of students previously categorized as "level 4." This is NOT a big change, but a reasonable, thoughtful, and long overdue one.

It is important for parents to understand that the IB MYP encompasses 9th and 10th Grades as well as 6th, 7th and 8th. While it is possible for a school district to "purchase" the IB MYP for only 6-8th Grades, the IB's "personal project" which is referred to as the culmination of the MYP, is undertaken in 10th Grade.

Deleveling, detracking ..... all this amounts to is IB's desire to teach to the lowest common denominator. I hope parents will take the time to read through this educational double-talk and understand how implementing IB will not improve the academic achievement of students - AT ANY LEVEL.

www.truthaboutib.com

I worry that many families who moved here recently, under the assumption the public schools would always offer accelerated and honors options (especially Math and Sciences) will most likely: A) move to towns with higher ranked public schools where honors and accelerated classes still exist. B) Will take their kids out of the public education system all together and attend one of the numerous private schools in the area which offer accelerated classes. And realistically, option B is not economically feasible for many residents.

Think about the long term effect on the economies of the towns of South Orange and Maplewood. If you peg your education structure to the lowest common denominator, then maybe not today, but over the next few years, you will see a marked increase in families leaving the area. One of the main factors in families choosing a town is the the public school system. This could have a serious ripple effect... people leave, property values decline, local stores will not have the foot traffic and patronage, etc.

It is a fact of macro-economics, not a political opinion... There is a correlation that most towns with great/good local economies have great/good public schools.

I and many other parents in the 2 towns with children in the public school system will watch closely how this progresses. Remember we have the #1 ranked public school in the next town over, they have held that rank for years... and I don't see them looking to de-level anything.

Accelerated classes will still be offered. Please read the proposal before you comment on it. A comparable school distrct to ours is not millburn, but Montclair. Montclair has never tracked students to the extent our distrct does. Their property values seem just fine.

I'm working to get the full proposal posted. I'll let you all know when it's on the site!

10 to 12 levels in our middle schools? If that doesn't indicte the absurdity our the leveling system, I don't know what does. These changes did NOT happen overnight, and they are not radical. They have been discussed and debated for years. We've also had two school board elections which clearly showed the majority of the voters in our community support deleveling and leveling up. Challenge and excellence are still very much at the core of our schools. I don't know why some people think that heterogenous groupings of children in middle school leads to the apocalypse. Let's face it, for those content with the status quo (I.e., my child benefits), any change is too fast, too radical.

Didn't mean to be rude. Just wanted to correct the error. Thanks Mary in advance for postng the full proposal!

Jeffrey--deleveling has not been "ineffective." Leveling has harmed many students. All the interventions you cite are terrific. But sustaining a system of tracking will simply continue to inflict harm. Both deleveling and early interventions (already being implemented under Osborne) are called for.

Amy and Jeff.

I'm not seeing any information or signals that deleveling was effective. We had grade inflation, a signal the bottom had dropped from our struggling students and the same number of kids leveled in 8th grade as in 7th showing no academic improvements.

Of equal concern is the plan to collapse levels 2-3-4 all into "grade level" (what happened to "college prep", I do wonder). But a look at the recent NJASK and Final Grades presented by the District shows that the majority of level 2 kids struggle academically scoring partially proficient on the NJASK and half them get Fs on the finals and ~15% get Ds. How will it benefit any part of the spectrum to collapse all of these kids into "grade level"?

I stand by my statement "the leveling system is broken". However, ignoring where the breaks are and simply mushing kids together as some magic fixative bandaid is the stuff of fairy tales.

Why can't we address what needs to be fixed to strengthen the entire system as compare to weaken the entire system?

Readers, I've just posted the full IB/de-leveling proposal on the site: http://patch.com/A-pBgq
My apologies for not doing this in the first place.

Regarding the question above about accelerated classes for 8th graders in math and language arts, here's the relevant language from the proposal:

"Accelerated Math and English Language Arts courses (see above). Students who qualify would be able to take 9th grade mathematics and English Language Arts courses for high school credit while in eighth grade. While the criteria would need to be set in the 11-12 school year, we anticipate this being approximately 12-15% of the eighth grade class for both subject, similar to the current proportion for mathematics."

Amy, Thanks for posting this. Still unspecified are the metrics the superintendent is proposing to determine how students will gain access into these accelerated courses. Will they include NJASK scores, teacher recommendation, in-house district wide assessments like we currently have in Math?

The proposal is also unclear as to whether the current metrics for inclusion into the accelerated math program will remain unchanged.

Brian Osborne really needs to be fired before his radical agenda is allowed to go any further forward. If anything, leveling students into appropriate groups based upon their previous academic acheivement is the best way to most good for the most students. The acheivement gap is a fact of life so let's face reality. Until we find and implement a better alternative to capitalism (good luck) there will always be haves and have nots. This has nothing to do with race; it's all about economics. The "achievement gap" is a class gap. Why Osborne and Co. can't figure this out is beyond me. It's Osborne and the BOE's job to make the district as competitive and high achieving as possible. Their job is not to experiment in unproven social engineering schemes. Do any of us really think that our students are being sufficiently challenged by a district that spends close to $14,000 per student per year? I think Osborne and Co. really need to sit down and think about their priorities.
And 2 quick things to think about: 1) Have any of these people ever sat in a classroom with several unmotivated students? If not, let me tell you it sucks the enjoyment out of school and makes it pretty difficult to absorb information 2) Yes, the steps in de-leveling have not been huge, but it's perfectly clear that Osborne and Co. intend to fully delevel the district. They're just doing it one step at a time.

But Amy, you need to be realistic. The superintendent and the democratically elected school board is not going to change society, nor is it their job to do so. You can't administrate your way around class differences and what students of different backgrounds are exposed to. You also can't administrate your way around dealing with students who have no interest in learning. Why should a school district punish motivated students by placing them in the same classrooms as unmotivated students? In truth, one of the reasons our diverse population co-exists is that we're able to cater to students of different needs by placing them in appropriate levels. I'm interested in having the best, most competitive district we can be. That's what the school administration needs to focus on. Osborne's system is a disaster that will reinforce mediocrity. I don't know how long you've been around here, but Columbia used to be the top ranked high school in the state, and in a district with far less money than many around it.

With regard to the comment comparing us to Montclair in that they have less tracking than we do. Montclair currently has an extensive system of magnet schools. This makes the comparison moot.

I think you're talking about the elementary schools? There is a choice system for elementary schools in Montclair. And this could be very relevant for our district. If we went to an all choice elementary school district, rather than a one "demonstration" school district, and it could be "controlled" choice so that there is racial and socio-economic integration across the district, then it would benefit all students. There is great disparity in socio-economic status of families between our elementary schools. Of course, I realize politically this is a non-starter in our district. I'm not sure why that's so, but I haven't ever heard it discussed.

Amy:

Might I ask what is your relation to the Board of Ed? Do you work for them, either as an employee or as a paid consultant or strategist? I notice you are so quick to reply to any post that is not in 100% agreement, even if there are points which somewhat lean toward or are not in full opposition to board strategy. You haven't missed one! even though its the busy holiday season. Yet you never truly addressing the point expressed by the others, but retort with statistics (some which cannot be confirmed) or other education strategies related to de-leveling. Curious if you are financially motivated to do so?

If not, please do not take offense at my question, you can easily understand in this day and age your vehemence and laser focus on this one particular topic could easily be perceived as the signs of a spin doctor or a paid strategist or consultant.