The district administration presented its proposed redesign of the Accelerated & Enriched (A&E) math program at the November 3 board meeting. The district has introduced numerous changes to better address students’ social and emotional development, and the proposed elimination of the A&E math program for grades four and five has become the focal point of the debate between support for the district’s commitment to the “whole child” and parents who believe the changes are diluting the curriculum.
More than 50 parents were in attendance as assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction Martin Smith unveiled a program redesign in which the accelerated math program would begin in middle school and the grades four and five program would be replaced with differentiated instruction.
Currently, nearly 50 students participate in the A&E program for grades four and five at Village and Millstone River schools under the tutelage of two A&E teachers. Program selection begins in third grade, and in addition to teacher recommendations, parents can nominate their children to participate in the program’s entry exams.
Under the redesigned A&E program, all students would be assessed in the fifth grade and qualifying students would enter the A&E program in sixth grade. (The math level sequence from grades seven through 12, which ends with honors multivariable calculus, will remain the same.) In addition the current testing criteria would be replaced with a multi-criteria assessment, though Smith said the new screening process still needs further study.
The main difference, Smith said, is fourth and fifth graders would no longer be separated into math and A&E math classes. Instead there will be differentiated instruction, or flexible grouping within a heterogeneous classroom. Math instruction would include a more diverse range of materials, and more advanced students would receive separate math instruction. Two A&E math teaching positions would be eliminated, and one teacher resource specialist position for math would be created to aid teachers with implementing differentiated instruction. The math specialist would also provide small group instruction for students “far above and beyond” in math level. (After recent increases, there are currently six general teaching resource specialists, one in each K-5 school, and five K-8 G&T specialists.)
The proposed program redesign would be fully implemented within the next three years: this year’s third graders would not be assessed, while students in grades four through seven can test into A&E. In the 2016-’17 academic year, fourth graders would learn under differentiated instruction, which will be implemented in fifth grade in the 2017-’18 academic year. In May, 2018, all fifth graders that year will be assessed for the grade six A&E program through the new screening criteria.
Changing the screening process from parent nomination to assessing all students aims to increase the number of students in the program.
In addition, the district saw problems among third grade test takers. “We saw an awful lot of students who were frustrated, who broke down crying,” Smith said. “We want to move away from a high stakes situation that might lead to labeling.”
He explained that everyone benefits from an enriched math program, and the redesigned A&E program provides a variety of math programming for gifted students but not a separate A&E track at the elementary school level.
“We are seeking to identify gifted behavior, but not label,” Smith said. “Fourth and fifth grade would be focused on enrichment, not acceleration.”
The flexible grouping of all grade four and five math students would be similar to the “workshop” model already in place for K-8 language arts classes. Smith said a few math teachers already provide more advanced students with different material, and the new math teacher resource specialist will provide professional development.
“Rather than a lockstep approach, where all students get the same problems and work at the same pace moving into a unit, there are mini-lessons and then a lot more opportunity to work in differentiated ways, with different sets of worksheets,” Smith said.
This model aims to recognize and meet the needs of all students. Smith said the current A&E and regular math tracks are “one size fits all.” He noted there are advanced students not in A&E who are not being stimulated by regular math.
Board president Tony Fleres said this was the first time board members had seen details of the proposed action plan.
Several board members asked clarifying questions, and board member Yingchao Zhang’s suggestion of a more delayed A&E phase out, given the success of the current A&E program and the uncertainty of the proposed one, drew applause from parents.
“Could we have a parallel effort?” Zhang said. “We could still have introduction of differentiated instruction while delaying the limiting of A&E.”
Smith said he has heard students use the word failure to describe not being in A&E, and the program redesign would move away from such labeling in elementary school.
Fleres added: “I’ve heard board members use the word failures.”
Board member Taylor Zhong asked if teachers could handle differentiated instruction of a wide range of math levels, and he also gave the example of one of his sons being cut from the basketball team only to earn a spot later on.
Zhong’s comment drew a response from superintendent David Aderhold, who emphasized that sports and math are not the same.
“It’s not okay for students to label themselves as failures. That’s not acceptable,” Aderhold said. “Shame on us as a community. It’s not acceptable for parents to have kids think of themselves in this way.”
More than 20 parents made public comments in response to the presentation.
Several parents were open to the differentiated learning and flexible grouping, but there were concerns over whether the new model would be effective and whether the A&E program should be maintained while the model is implemented.
“School clusters are only as effective as the consistency of teachers,” said Kalpana Patel, who has one child who did not enter A&E and another who is currently enjoying the program. “I have personally experienced it, and it has not worked” in language arts classes. “Please ensure it is something you prepare for.”
“I liked the flexible grouping strategy and I think changing the test criteria is good,” said Niraj Patel, who has one child in A&E and a third grader. “It’s not that A&E is seen as a track to success, it’s that the base math is seen as too low. Flexible grouping clearly requires a higher caliber of teacher. Four speeds is quite complicated, that’s something the board has to look out for.”
Firouzeh Nur-Vaccaro commented that the current regular curriculum may be too one-size-fits-all, and that advanced kids who do not make it into A&E may be bored.
Other parents asked why enrichment programs could not be expanded for science and language arts, as well as math.
Swami Venkataraman moved into the community this year, and his son is not yet in elementary school. Like many others he was attracted to the school district, though he also has friends who avoided the area because of the high stress reputation.
“If you can accommodate more children in A&E, why not do that?” Venkataraman said.
A couple of parents pushed back against the administration’s characterization of after school math and reading programs, saying it gives their children more time to learn.
“Why is everyone bashing Kumon and extra classes?” Ming Pan said. “What rules are they breaking to make the extra effort? Everyone makes the extra effort for things they value. To solve the problem of stress and well-being we should not put the blame on the A&E program itself.”
Aderhold spoke at length after the public comments.
“Clearly my memo has resonated and driven a conversation that has not been had in a long time,” Aderhold said, referring to the 16-page manifesto he sent to district parents in October. “We need to think hard about consequences. How about the 120 students last year sent for mental health assessments? We have destructive stress in the community. Something in the system is doing this, and we need to ask why. In my memo I’ve only commented on the things we have done to date. The conversation is being had.”
“When it comes to where we want to go, we have the opportunity to lead the redesign efforts of public education. Structure drives systems. Third grade is just not appropriate developmentally. I have no doubt that our educators are capable and qualified,” he added. “A lot of my colleagues and friends in the superintendent world are looking at what we do.”
The rest of the meeting’s agenda was passed, 8-0. Isaac Cheng was absent.
