Duly noted.
I just signed up for conference slots at our state gifted teachers conference. I’d say that more than half the conference sessions are in some way related to the question of how we increase representation in the program, how we reach out to underserved populations, how we ensure that our testing protocols aren’t biased, etc. It’s a huge issue in the field right now.
There are political forces that can make it difficult. Articles like this make it seem like the pressure is entirely from social justice warriors who want to destroy advanced education. But I’d say the most harmful political forces are politicians who want us to remain gatekeepers that de facto keep the programs disproportionately pouplated with children from wealthier families, from families where parents have advanced degrees, from families whose racial backgrounds are stereotyped as higher intelligence, etc.
If we are unable to improve our programs, they’re going to die out. The political forces that want to prevent change are deadly to advanced education.
Hmm. I’ve been volunteering in a high school math classroom, and this isn’t what i see. Yes, the teacher has a lesson every day, and all the kids get the same lesson. But their work is structured into online modules. And each section has a “teaching” module, which you could really do without the teacher, a practice module, and a test.
Each child needs to get most of the problems right before they move on. And if they can’t do that on their own, the teacher (or I) can help them. Their classmates can also help them on everything except the tests.
As a result, they are all doing different work. A gifted child can get ahead of the teacher, and a lot of the kids are “behind”, but not “left behind” because they are still making progress and still getting support.
And yes, it’s possible for a kid to finish the curriculum ahead of the end of the semester. I’ve never seen a kid do that by much, and instead of getting supplemental work, they mostly hang out, socialize, and help their classmates. But it’s possible.
Also, last year, when i was there in person, I was amused at how much my class violated stereotypes. The nerdy-looking Asian boy was struggling, and needed a lot of help and hand-holding. A tall fat Black girl was the star of the class, and spent most of her time helping her peers. A Black boy lacked confidence and drive, but the teacher pushed him to excel, and he was usually the first to complete a test and the teacher wouldn’t let him advance until he got a perfect score. (Most kids were allowed to get one or two wrong, but they earned a higher grade if everything was correct.)
I want to put emphasis on this. One of my biggest criticisms of liberals is their complete inability to create equitable public education. Boston is one of the most liberal cities in the nation and yet the education for minorities sucks.
My own opinion is that while liberals talk the talk, when it comes down to their own children they act just like any other bigot. In boston white students either go to private schools or get funneled into programs like in the OP or the exam schools. Minorities get what’s left. This allows white parents to ignore the overall problems in the school system and thus little changes.
If canceling some of the white-dominated programs ends up in a better school system then I’m in favor. I understand the lament that we are potentially holding back some students but it will be hard to enact systematic changes if the most privaleged can ignore the problem.
What if changing the tests, doing outreach etc helps, but you still can’t achieve equity? I recall reading that in the UK poor kids are already a whole year behind their better-off peers when they start school at 4 years old. And in the US poverty is racialised… how can we expect teachers to solve a societal problem?
Were the kids working online even before the lockdown? It sounds a bit like workbooks, which work well for some kids, but I could never get anywhere with them - don’t know why. Mostly in the UK the teacher teaches something new, everyone works through a list of problems in the textbook (if the teacher was feeling merciful they told us to only do the odd ones), and then more of the same as homework. If someone can’t answer the questions the teacher will help and explain more, but everyone moves on regardless. (This is high school, not sure what happens at primary level these days, and my primary school was so tiny it doesn’t make any sense to compare.)
But you’ve helped explain @BigT’s story, anyway.
I don’t think it’s bigoted to want to give your own kids a decent education. It perpetuates the problem, but it’s very chicken and egg to solve; until the schools are improved, parents will opt their kids out if they can, and those are the same parents who would have the most political capital to push for improvement.
What about Asian parents in Boston? Why are their kids over-represented in the program?
I disagree with you on the definition of bigot but I think it best we leave that behind. I agree that we want the parents with the most capital to push for improvements. My issue is that, with the exam schools and advanced programs, those parents are currently being served and they have an incentive to keep it that way. Canceling any program that primarily serves those already at an advantage will hopefully realign their incentives for the betterment of all.
Any solution to a human problem is going to be messy and imperfect. I don’t expect any parent to agree to this; I probably wouldn’t. The great failure of liberals is that they can’t overcome this.
Yes, they did most of their work on chromebooks. There used to be a stack of them in the classroom, that they used while in class. Now they all have chromebooks at home, of course.
I hope they have reliable ones. Maybe a third of the ones in the cart last year had swollen batteries and didn’t work reliably.
I predict if the exam schools are abolished then you’ll see a big increase in segregation-by-postcode. And that means the current low chance for disadvantaged kids to get into the good schools will be replaced with no chance.
The US already had a great deal of segregation by post code.
Of course…!
Things have certainly changed a lot since I was at school.
I’m sure. How does Boston compare to other cities?
From my 13 years of living there I would say they invented the practice.
So if they get rid of the exam schools, won’t kids just go to school in the area they live and still be segregated?
In my experience of Boston environs, they will never, ever get rid of Boston Latin, Roxbury Latin, et al (or their current namesakes). It is too much part of their cherished mystique of superiority.
I disagree. You’ve come up with a good rationale for leaving the system as it is which I find unacceptable.
I do agree with you in the sense that any attempt to “fix” the problem will lead to other problems; the goal is to minimize them. To me the mostly likely downside of abolishing the priviledged programs is white (and liberal) flight from the city to the suburbs with higher performing schools. This already happens to some degree when Boston parents move to Brookline or Newton. Perhaps that puts some pressure on Boston.
In my experience, and with the clarifications, we are then left with much ado about the wrong item, let us see if the conservative sources the OP used will correct their reports… (the line about “Boston is suspending entry to its advanced learning program.” Is how right wing sources like The Daily Wire and the Epoch Times are spinning that report, mostly as a racial issue)
Not holding my breath for that.
I’m not sure what you’re looking at? The OP cites WGBH, which is one of Boston’s NPR stations. Hardly a conservative bastion.
The original source was corrected, the line (spin) from the OP can be found as coming from the right wing info-sphere.
Aren’t you in the UK? The UK has better social mobility than the US:
Since US schools are funded by the local area, wealthy parents leaving will mean lower funding, right?
In theory having a test to get into the best schools should give poorer pupils a better chance than doing nothing. Wealthy parents can buy a house in a good school district, but they can’t buy their kid a top test result. But it obviously hasn’t worked out that way.
The headline in the OP was what appeared on the article yesterday, when I posted it. They sneakily changed it in the meantime.
I remember seeing a report that social mobility was worse in the UK than the US (and the US was worse than every other rich country). But that was a few years ago, so presumably it’s changed since then. At any rate, the UK has poor social mobility compared to most of Europe and it’s not improving, so it must have got even worse in the US. 
I guess I’m still not sure what the issue is. I assume we can all agree that Boston is temporarily suspending an advanced program due to a possible racial bias. Regardless of some headline from a right-wing source it is still topic worth discussing. I obviously disagree with DemonTree but I certainly understand where he’s coming from.