Someone wasn’t prepared for class Monday!
Monday’s School Board work session (7.18.11) on the Honors issue ran for two hours. It could have been more productive if Peter Noonan, the Assistant Superintendent for Instructional Services, had come prepared for the same discussion many School Board members – and members of the public – thought they came for.
Some attendees thought the discussion would focus on curriculum choices that best serve all FCPS students. Noonan’s presentation instead focused on why FCPS believes a two-tiered curriculum best serves underrepresented minority students.
When Noonan finished his presentation, Patty Reed -who represents the Providence District – stated, “I’m very troubled…this is not an objective analysis. I would throw out this presentation and start over…present the pros and cons of a three-tier curriculum and see how many other school systems offer three tiers.”
Dr. Dale stated, “You raised a different question than what we came for. That wasn’t today’s presentation.”
Reed replied,“This is what makes me most upset. That is a decision that should be made by this Board. We never had that discussion (to remove Honors courses from the curriculum).”
Dan Storck of the Mount Vernon District told Noonan that he did not understand FCPS’ assertion that the curriculum for standard level, Honors and AP courses is essentially the same. Noonan later stated, “So why have a middle choice (Honors) when the classes are the same?”
The problem is that all students are not the same. Some students are not ready or prepared to take multiple, college level AP courses. Although the curriculum for the three tiers may be similar, the classroom expectations between standard level, Honors and AP courses are vastly different. Why not have a middle option to serve all levels of learners who want a rigorous, yet balanced course load?
FCPS’ excuse was to cite College Board marketing materials which claim that students who score a 1-2 on the AP exams are better prepared for college. (College Board is the organization that prepares and sells the AP curriculum to thousands of high schools across the country.)
At-Large School Board Member Tina Hone didn’t buy the argument.
She asked, “Is it better for a kid to take the AP class and fail the exam or take the Honors class and pass?”
FCPS’ curriculum expert Noonan said, “The AP class.”
Hone quickly pulled out a Harvard study demonstrating that students who passed Honors courses did better in college than kids who got a failing 1-2 grade on the AP test.
Hone stated, “This (study) runs a bit counter to what you guys are saying. It’s saying the Honors kids are doing well. This is the kind of data we need to make decisions on.”
FCPS would like the focus of this debate to stay on underrepresented minorities and closing the achievement gap. But here is the reality: Limited curriculum choices are not helping our students overall.
While there has been a small increase in the number of FCPS minority students who are taking AP courses, it is clear that a much greater number of FCPS students are now relegated to Standard Level (gen ed) courses because FCPS has removed the Honors option and these students can’t afford the stress that comes with a full plate of AP courses.
Bottom line – Honors courses provide rigor for all student groups – no matter what their ethnicity or socio-economic background. The learning potential of the overall student body should not be sacrificed so that FCPS can artificially close the achievement gap.
FCPS should focus on what’s best for ALL students. Bring back the upper-level, high-school Honors courses FCPS and continue encouragement of minority participation in both AP and Honors courses. That would truly be a win-win for all FCPS students!
- Restore the Honors Courses (redapplemom.wordpress.com)
- Hey Jay Mathews – No Need to Re-Invent the Wheel on Honors (redapplemom.wordpress.com)
- FCPS Flexing Its Muscle to Kill Upper-Level Honors Courses (redapplemom.wordpress.com)