Response from District

Administrators have made some efforts to provide more transparency and to modify the selection processes for math and science in 2024, but issues remain.  Furthermore, our petition seeking input into a revised program and selection process has been denied.

​

Petition Request Denied

On March 8, three parents met with Dr. Passi, Superintendent, and Dr. Gately, Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum & Instruction, to present the petition and to propose a committee to incorporate parent feedback on the advanced placement programs and selection. 

 

Dr. Passi stated that he has decided against forming a committee at this time.  He cited the following reasons for denying the request for a committee:
 

1) He would like to accumulate 5 years of data so that he can fully evaluate the impact of the policy change proposed in 2020.
 

2) Pending litigation prevents him from forming a committee.

​

This reasoning fails to acknowledge that:

• Based on the number of petition signatures, parents do not want to wait 3 more years.  They want to make changes now.  This "test" of the data is weakening the academic experience for many students who will not be able to redo their middle and high school experience.
   

• The limited number of accelerated class sections and the flaws in the current selection process (a CogAT cut off and the use of teacher ratings) is denying access to deserving students.  The planned selection methods for math and science continue to incorporate teacher ratings that are inherently flawed and plan for only one section of advanced math and AP Intensive Science in each school.
   

• Prior cohorts (2021-2023) were selected inconsistently making future performance data comparison invalid.
   

• Pending litigation deals with past placement, not future placement. Future advanced placement programs and selection should be improved regardless.  Furthermore, the district could settle at any time, but chooses not to.

​

Administrators raised the following points:

1) Teachers requested teacher ratings be considered.

2) Administrators would prefer eliminating the advanced math program.

​

We disagree on these points.  

• Many teachers do not want the responsibility of selecting advanced placement students. This adds stress to their job. In fact, 3 out of 10 teachers essentially abdicate their input responsibility by giving all students in their class the same rating (4 out of 4). See teacher ratings. 
   

• Parents would prefer for more, not fewer, accelerated/advanced placement options. This is consistent with the parent view during the past revision to advanced placement policy in 2019-2020 when parents strongly disagreed with the same suggestion to eliminate the advanced math program from elementary school.

​

Addressing Transparency

On February 27, 2024, Lauren Tallarine, District Director of Math & Business, sent a lengthy email with details about the selection process and curriculum options. Click here to read it.  This email is one positive outcome resulting from your support.
 

1. The level of detail was a significant increase from communication in prior years in an effort to be more transparent.
    

2. The science selection process has changed meaningfully from recent years and now incorporates an objective science exam.  Click here for information on advanced science selection from 2020-2023.  Click here for information on the "new" science selection process.

​

The letter also highlights the continued need to work with administrators to revise the selection process and curriculum flexibility.  The following were not addressed:
 

1. Revising the advanced math selection process to eliminate subjective, inaccurate and ineffective measures (teacher rating and work sample.) Click here for the latest educational research on the problems with the teacher rating scales.
    

2. Expanding access in advanced math and advanced science through additional sections
    

3. Eliminating the need for tutors to skip 6th grade math by reverting back to a 5th grade acceleration class
    

4. Expanding the selection pool through a reduced or eliminated CogAT threshold
    

5. Allowing for increased access to advanced/AP science classes for those who were mistakenly not chosen for LEAPES or granted access to advanced math since the new 2020 policy was implemented
    

6. Eliminating the GPA bump afforded to LEAPES students from the additional Earth Science AP taken before they enter high school. 

​

Addressing 8th Graders Denied in 6th Grade

For 8th grade students who were hurt by the new selection policy proposed in 2020 and who are performing well in the non-advanced math placement program, the district is suggesting that students to take two math classes in 9th grade (Geometry and Algebra 2) so that they have the necessary prerequisites to take AP Chem in 10th grade. They have contacted those parents individually.

​

There are two issues with this proposed solution:

1. The Algebra 2 curriculum is designed to be taken after geometry. It is not easy to succeed in this unusual math pathway.  The district has limited information on how successful students will be attempting this feat as few have done it before. Both of those math grades will hit the high school transcript that is sent colleges.
    

2. This path cannot fully compensate for the failure to include these students in advanced math in sixth grade.  Click here for an explanation.  Selection needs to be accurate and inclusive in 6th grade.

​