Citing Racial Inequities, Boston Public Schools Suspend New Advanced Learning Classes
by Meg Woolhouse
February 26, 2021
GBH News

In an article dated Feb 26, 2021, GBH News reports: "Citing Racial Inequities, Boston Public Schools Suspend New Advanced Learning Classes"
https://www.wgbh.org/news/education...chools-suspend-advanced-learning-classes

What is your interpretation of this announcement, indigo?

what NYC did to fix this is put an accelerated gifted program in a school where whites did not want to go. So in DD's program, you had to have 99th percentile on a test, this school had about 85th percentile. But it was practically all African american, all accelerated curriculum. I think that is what has to be done. Locate the programs so that you get more students from those minority groups

To be fair, closer inspection of the advanced learning program finds that the majority of them are housed in school-wide enrichment programs, where all students have access to whatever constitutes advanced learning there, with a few more described as hybrid (non identified and identified students in inclusion classes). Only a handful are true separate programs, which is the focus of the headline. (4 out of 25)

It often seems that the education system’s approach to equity and levelling the playing field is to try to actively prevent high ability kids from working beyond the curriculum (my eldest used to do so in polite defiance of some of her teachers). Little wonder that there’s a massive herd of elephants in the room - a multi billion dollar coaching industry, even in a small country like Oz.

This strategy has been used since NCLB in several districts here. There are magnet programs, including GT, placed in poor performing schools. However, they are very popular and people are willing to travel. As a result, the test score averages improve, making the school no longer appear to be "failing".

My interpretation of this announcement is two-fold.

1) To the degree that a lottery is involved, I would advocate for re-purposing a number of general ed seats to become seats for advanced academics, so that supply equals demand (as determined by the number of pupils achieving a qualifying score). All children who qualify at this level of advanced academics would have access.

2) To the degree that some students/parents/teachers believe there may be undeveloped potential, I would encourage further sharing of the work of Hart & Risley: engaging children, from infancy on, in conversation (which has been to found to create lasting benefits in helping neuro development, vocabulary development, and social skills in communication). In as little as 4-5 years, the new class of incoming students may exhibit a higher degree of readiness and ability. As with much research, there has been pushback & "debunking" however other similar studies reinforce the findings, results, and conclusions of Hart & Risley.
Links -
- https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-98021-000
- http://www.danielwillingham.com/dan...ng-of-hart-risley-and-how-we-use-science
- Hart&Risley research in the 1960s - Dr. Todd Risley on the value of talking to even the youngest kids
- Hart&Risley research in the 1960s - NPR Jan 10, 2011
- Hart&Risley research in the 1960s - high level summary
- Hart&Risley research in the 1960s - back-and-forth conversation with children rather than just directives to children
- Comparison: Hart-Risley (lasting impact) VS HeadStartprogram (short-term effect)