The number of librarians currently on the cut list for the middle school under the Regional budget. It might not seem so bad (and was certainly skimmed over in the presentation--MS, one librarian, $54,000) until you realize that the middle school currently HAS only one librarian! So yes, next year our middle school (enrollment ~550) will have no librarian.
When questioned about this by a parent, the Superintendent reiterated that these cuts were proposed by the building administration and this library position was discussed and continued to remain on the cuts list. It was further implied that because "the community" wanted to retain world languages at the middle school, the librarian was being cut. Now I was all for retaining world languages at the middle school (although if they had to be reduced to a few choices I could have lived with that even though I would have felt bad for the ~30 kids who took German and Russian in the seventh grade and thus wouldn't be able to continue that language in the eighth grade) but at the expense of the librarian?
Superintendent Geryk is right, these are hard choices and something must go. But is there really that much fat in the middle school that it can afford a cut like this? That reflects a comment from a staff member from the middle school who pointed out that in the Tier 1 cuts, there is the elimination of the middle school librarian as well as the elimination of two assistant coaches for varsity sports in the high school. She pointed out that those are very different things and I would agree.
Frankly, I think the School Committee and our administration needs to take a good hard look at what the core values of our schools and prioritize them above all others. For example, do we need so many electives in the high school? The ARHS staff directory lists five staff members in Family and Consumer Science and the department web site lists 10 different Family and Consumer Science courses. This is just my opinion, but I would say that a librarian is more of a core educational value than "Clothing and Textiles I" or "ProStart Culinary Arts II." Which I am sure are interesting and engaging courses, but as Superintendent Geryk said, hard choices must be made. Perhaps the administration and the School Committee could start with electives, retaining the core academic mission of both our middle and our high schools.
47 comments:
I am going to play devil's advocate here. Not all students in our high school will go on to college - some will enter the work force directly from high school. Perhaps the Clothing and Textile course, as well as the Culinary Arts class are meant to help prepare those non-college bound students for their life after high school.
The school's motto is Every Child Every Day or something like that. At the high school level this means to me that we have a responsibility to prepare all students for life after high school, including those planning to enter the work force directly after high school.
If there is no librarian, who will manage the library? Books need to be purchased/replaced, cataloged, tracked, placed on shelves. Middle school students are supposed to learn library research skills, so from whom would they do that?
To me, it's crazy to give up the librarian in favor of such a huge selection of languages: we simply must choose a core set of languages (2 or perhaps 3) and keep the librarian. The choice would be harder if we were deciding between a librarian and all languages, of course, but thankfully that's not where we are.
I hope that the School Committee will do the right thing here.
Anon 8:28AM: Your point is well taken. I looked it up, and according to the Massachusetts statistics on plans of graduates of ARHS, 86% of the graduates go on to college, 1% to "other post-secondary," 9% to work, 2% "other," and 1% "unknown." So yes, there are some students who do not go to college and yes, these electives might prepare them for work, but for these students, there are also other, free options for high school (including transportation). To follow through with the examples from Family and Consumer Science at ARHS, Franklin Tech seems to have an extensive culinary arts program, as does Smith Voc. In addition, they offer career-directed pathways for many of the areas found in the ARHS departments of Business Education and Technology Education. Students who are academically-inclined do not have another option (although they could do school choice into another district but would then have to provide their own transportation).
Anon 8:42AM: According to the presentation last night, there would still be a paraprofessional in the library to "shelve books." Irv Rhodes, one of our new School Committee members and former middle school librarian pointed out that running a quality library involved much more than shelving books.
Alison:
Anon 8:28 again. Thank you for looking up those numbers. My response is that perhaps the 12% of students who do not go on to college want to remain in their local high school. I would not want to see ARHS become only a school for the preparation of college bound students. An elite place of learning comes to mind.
Our school system should be able to educate Every Child in Amherst who chooses to attend school in their local school buildings. To even propose that the 12% who do not go on to college should be sent out of Amherst to get their education elsewhere smacks entirely of elitism.
I am deeply disturbed by the recently proposed cut of the Middle School librarian. This cut puts a burden on middle school students not borne by any others in Amherst. It will deprive middle school students of critically needed help in research and use of the library. The library is used by 550 middle school students. Every child, college-bound or not, needs library skills, to learn about the world through books and computer research and to find a great book to read.
Why are we treating our Middle Schools differently -- again? Already, unlike any other grade in Amherst K to 12, 7th graders have no art class. Now the 7th and 8th graders will have no librarian.
No other school in Amherst is facing the loss of its librarian – the only teacher who serves every single child in a school building. What can the justification for this cut be? Do 7th and 8th graders need a librarian less?
The goal we have been told is to protect the core. If librarians and art teachers are not the core, why are there librarians and art teachers at the other schools?
You can keep asking questions like these, like I have, and get no explanations. No one could explain the thinking behind this cut beyond the fact that cuts must be made. Last night, the Superintendent said cutting the librarian’s position has been under discussion for months, but could not relate the discussion around it. Last night several school committee members said that the budget and cuts reflected the community’s desires, i.e. the middle school foreign language program was kept largely intact because parents spoke out in support of it. Other school committee members said administrators made the cuts and their only role was to listen to proposed cuts and determine the final amount of the budget.
Is this really how School Committees view their role and how cuts are made and restored? If so, parents, please email the Superintendent and please come to the next Regional School Committee meeting on April 28th at 7 p.m. and let's get our librarian back.
To get a sense of what’s happening to the Middle School, it’s useful to look at the High School where there are no comparably deep cuts. Instead, the high school is cutting teachers who teach under-enrolled classes. Average class sizes do not increase. The school librarian is retained and each grade can take art classes. Twelve art classes are offered. No foreign language is cut. The high school students do face the burden of an extra study hall but it seems that raising class sizes could eliminate this problem, since having a larger class seems better than no class at all.
Clearly, the core – and more – of the high school program remains protected. The website for the High School list 12 different Art classes, 8 Business Education classes, 20 Tech Ed class, 19 Performing Arts classes, 10 Computer Classes and 7 Family & Consumer Science classes – 76 elective courses. In addition, the website lists about 85 courses in the Science, Math, English and Social Studies.
Can the Middle School librarian be saved by some changes at the High School? While the current proposal will eliminate a number of under-enrolled courses at the High School, does it eliminate all under-enrolled courses? If small class sizes do not affect academic outcomes, as research shows, then class sizes should be increased for all grades. Could increasing class sizes to students throughout the regional school system save the middle school librarian? Could it restore 7th grade art?
It is clear from the proposed Middle School cuts is that there isn’t much left to cut from this school’s budget. The current proposal harms its academic program and students’ ability to use the library and research subjects. Can we say this is true of the high school – with its over 160 course offerings?
There needs to be more fairness and consistency across our school system. If every elementary school and the high school has and needs a librarian, the middle school must have one too. If library services must be cut, the pain of that cut must be shared across the grades. The high school and middle school should share, proportionately, a librarian. The same should be true for art. If students in Amherst aren’t being treated equally, why is this so?
The middle school gets treated differently than the high school because of the structure of the students schedules. The high school has separate classes for everyone, the middle school used to, but now has the teams. To change the set-up, we would have to go back to being a Jr High and everyone picks their classes. Which would be fine to me, but many people seem to like the Teams.
So the high school can go in and look at how many people enroll in each class and cut the ones which have the fewest enrollments.
As far as cutting the "life skills" classes, that is a wrong move. Even worse to go and say that we can send those kids to the Voke schools. The would end up costing us a fortune!!!!! I also have a very hard time seeing someone say that those kids get things like transportation for free. That's making a BIG assumption that the kids who go to the Voke schools, are coming from "lower class" families. That's not always the case. Kids should be free to go to what ever school they feel most compatible for them, not just for the parents.
Amherst is about giving an excellent education to ALL children!!! It is not and should not be a one-track school system which only produces college bound kids!!
And finally the librarian cut HAS been on the budget sheets for months now. No one really asked much about it. Instead people focused more on the languages. If it was really a big concern, than people should have been speaking up a long time ago about this!!!! Let the ADMINISTRATION know your concerns about this cut and what you would give up in order to preserve it. Or come up with another way to fill that position, COLLEGES around here maybe?????
Anon 8:28: I would disagree...I think that a focus on core academics is the key to success for ALL of our students, whether they go on to college or not. I am not advocating the total elimination of electives but a reduction in offerings due to the budget situation.
Anon 1:00PM: I think your point about the middle school model being different than the high school model is a good one. Superintendent Geryk last night did allude to the fact that the team model is a more expensive one and if deeper cuts need to be made this year or in the near future, the middle school might need to rethink this model.
I was not implying that all students who choice one of our available vocational schools are "lower class!" Not at all. I was simply pointing out that, for students who do wish to pursue a vocational path right out of high school, there are two excellent vocational schools they can attend at no cost, and this attendance includes transportation. Similarly, students who would like to focus on the arts can apply to the Pioneer Valley Performing Arts School (at no cost but last time I checked, there was no free bus from Amherst).
And, as I said above, I think a focus on core academics is the best thing for ALL of our students who will be entering the workforce (whether right out of high school or after college) in an intensely competitive environment in a global economy where a good command of English, math, science, social studies, languages, and computers is no longer a plus but a necessity.
You are classist and elitest, Alison. I don't care how you couch it, you want to send all the voke kids out of Amherst and have Amherst be strictly for college bound kids. Thank God you are not on the school committee. People like you are dangerous.
It is one thing to focus on core academic subjects - and yes even those who are not bound for college need to have a good grounding in Math, Science, English and History/Social Studies. And it is important that all students have the opportunity to have a solid education in the core subjects. Also, the arts should be an important part of everyone's education. To me, the arts are also part of an excellent core education.
But comments like yours that if they are interested in a vocational track they should just leave Amherst and go to school elsewhere reveals your true colors.
I do not want ARHS to only have college bound kids in it.
I think we will need to agree to disagree - but I find your position, Alison dangerous.
Anon 2:24, give it a rest. She just pointed out an opportunity, and a very good FREE one, for kids who have a different interest in career path. If you want to make such rediculous assumptions about her and her intentions thats a problem you are having with jumping to conclusions. Lighten up.
Dear Alison
In recent years, ARHS has beefed-up its course offerings in the arts to respond to the arrival of the PV Performing Arts school. The reason why this was done was to save the ARS money. When someone goes to the performing arts school, they take their money with them. I do not know if that is the case when someone goes to one of the voke schools. If it is, then sending kids to the voke schools or the PV Performing Arts school will actually cost the Amherst Regional Schools in the long run. I wonder if you have considered that in your calculations.
If we have already identified the CORE curriculum as the most important part of what is being taught at any of the schools, why aren't those priorities being used when making budget cuts?
It frustrates me when the security of the statis quo is all people can imagine. No cuts will actually strengthen our MS. Chipping away at the current model is NOT the way to proceed with the MS cuts. Build a great model starting with the core (like Alison said) math, english, science, social studies and languages. Add some electives (choices) based on enhancing learning and student interest (musics, arts, drama, tech ed, computers).
Janet, I agree with you and others that the MS has taken the lion's share of cuts especially at tier 2 &3 levels - which it wrong. Can the MS spend its current dollars more wisely and have a more proportional cut at tier 2 & 3?
Anon 2:24PM: Sorry you find my position "dangerous" and my thoughts to be "classist and elitist." You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I did not, however, advocate sending all "voke kids" out of Amherst! I was simply, as Anon 2:33 pointed out, mentioning that there are two other great and accessible schools out there for students who are more interested in a vo-tech pathway than a college-bound path.
Anon 2:41PM: Yes, it does cost our school districts money when students choose to choice or charter out of our district. I do not think the assumption of students leaving should be a reason for Amherst/Amherst-Pelham to increase elective offerings, especially when students may go anyway, despite what ARHS might offer. The cultures at Franklin Tech, Smith Voc, and PVPA are much different than that at ARHS and, in the end, that might be what appeals to a student.
Cathy C: When I look at what the middle school has in terms of "extras," I don't see a lot. There is a very standard course of study for all students and unless they want to eliminate world languages (now off the table), music ensembles (never discussed that I know of), entire teams (which I know is an option at the Tier 2 level and would increase class sizes) or eliminate the team model entirely (which was mentioned at the meeting), I'm not sure what more could be cut. Instead, my post was wondering if cuts could be make among the high school elective courses to preserve the standard curriculum at the middle school.
Some ARHS college bound seniors defer entrance to college for a year, and are not accurately reflected in that 86% figure. Last year after graduation, some students moved out-of-state to establish residency before applying to other state colleges. Check with the Guidance Office at the high school.
That info is all online, and is broken down to the student by race and sex too. Very informative.
I think you are on the right track about cuts at the HS to help the MS, and I don't even have a MS kid now but one in HS! It is pretty bare bones at the MS, kind of makes ya wonder WHY??
Alison (and others),
You need to understand one point. The vocational schools are free to the students attending them, but NOT FREE to the district AT ALL!!! They come with a very heafty price tag for each child who attends them. (about $14,000/year, each child) Does this sound like a good way to save money in our schools by dropping those classes that are offered within our schools already? I believe we will very quickly see the benefits of continuing to offer these classes at ARHS instead of sending these kids to the voke schools.
Yeah, she very clearly stated that already. But this is about the KIDS and if they truely want to be an electrician or chef they will get a much better education there. It doesn't justify having so many electives just to keep them here.
How many of you really believe that these children will actually like going to school if we keep cutting away at the electives? Do you really believe that you will have genuine excitement from kids about going to school, if they are just in text book classes? Do you really think that will give them an advantage of getting into better colleges? Really? Please stop trying to brush kids off to the voc schools instead of educating them right here, where it will be a lot cheaper for us as a town. These are children you are talking about. All of these children have wonderful potential. It is our job to nurture and educate all of them, including the elective classes. If you cut our art, music, drama, pottery, cooking, photography etc, you are going to have a lot of kids loose interest in going to school and they WILL NOT perform well in the regular classes. There is a balance. They are doing the right thing by canceling the classes which have the enrollments. We will hurt these kids- ALL OF THEM- if we take too much away.
Information about students' plans after graduation can be found here:
Admission Statistics
and here:
School Profile.
As for electives, ARHS is a comprehensive high school. So, yes, we do have a wide variety of electives. However, you can't just count up the number of courses to understand the situation. I think that some people don't realize that elective courses are frequently taught with multiple levels simultaneously. For example, I teach Computer Programming I and III during the same class period. Many other elective teachers do the same thing. So there is no additional salary cost associated with those sections. It's just an additional opportunity for the students who find a passion in a particular field.
The students who sign up for electives are also the students who intend to attend college. Our elective program complements our academic program. Look at the ARHS students who recently won first prize in a nationwide business competition under the guidance of teacher Missy Shea. They are very strong students, and not just in business. If they apply to a competitive business program like UMass' Isenberg School of Management-- where they will be required to take courses like Calculus, Statistics, and Java Programming-- they will need a very strong academic record. That's the point of a good comprehensive high school: opportunities for excellence in a wide range of endeavors.
Alison,
You got a nasty posting right before mine, so, later go back and re-read what I said.
You made my point exactly by suggesting the 3 options that you see to make cuts at the MS. Of course there is a "very standard course of study" and I never suggested that there were extras, although the exploratories should be mentioned.
Completely restructure the MS - there are other options then the statis quo to deliver a different "very standard course of study".
I agree that it seems like a disproportinate (sp?) share of the core cuts seems to be coming from the MS. It seems tragic to be cutting the one and only librarian from the school. More than tragic. The MS kids will surely be at a disadvantage by not having someone to teach basic library and research skills.
The librarian is one person. Could we instead cut one teacher from the high school in order to retain the MS librarian? Surely we could find enough fat at the HS to warrant the elimiation of one teacher.
I also agree that increasing class sizes at the HS could be a way to save money. I understand that with the team concept at the MS raising class size is not an available alternative.
Finally, there has been talk about moving the 6th grade to the MS. This would bring some $ from the ES to the MS. Perhaps this idea needs to be seriously looked at.
It seems to me that the Amherst schools are ripe for a top to bottom look to see how we can structure them to best meet the needs of all of our students in the most financially prudent way possible. We should not be looking at this piecemeal with discussions of ES, MS and HS considered separately. I think its time for a comprehensive look at K-12 in its entirety.
Cathy C: Yes, those nasty comments can be distracting. I misunderstood what you were saying...from what I heard, the team approach was considered the "core" of the middle school but you are suggesting the possibility of doing away with that (if it saves money) and instead focusing on the "core" of English, math, science, languages, and social studies, not necessarily in the team structure? That sounds reasonable to me, although I don't know enough about the whole team concept (even after having kids there) to know what the relative benefits of "team" are. Based on what Superintendent Geryk said the other night, I take it that your suggestion is something that will be considered "under more dreastic cuts" either now or in future years. I hear that you are saying you would like that to be considered now.
Nina: Thank you for pointing out that some elective courses are taught together. That does potentially change the "count." Perhaps a more equitable comparison would be to look at how many FTE teachers are devoted to each of the subject areas in the high school. Is that available anywhere?
Your example of the amazing team that won the nationwide business competition makes my point--a strong academic focus is good for all students, even those most interested in a "business path." These days, all workers will be expected to have a strong grounding in all subject areas in order to compete in an increasingly-educated global workplace.
Anon 9:15PM: I not trying to "brush off" kids to "voke" schools nor do I deny that there is a possibility that if ARHS cut culinary arts, for example, some ARHS kids would then choose a vo-tech school (yes, taking choice school with them). But, as I said before, I am not in favor of beefing up elective offerings just to potentially keep some students who may or may not leave from going to a vo-tech, arts charter, or language immersion school. In addition, I have never said that electives should be eliminated; only reduced to preserve the core mission of the school which I believe is academic preparation. Nina is right--this is a comprehensive high school and as such SHOULD offer electives. But in difficult budgetary times, something has to go, and I think electives is the place to look.
Finally, I do not buy the argument that we need to keep all those electives so that kids will "like going to school." Yes, some students might not enjoy some of their academic classes, but there are also those who do not currently like sitting in two study halls and/or having to take elective courses they are not interested in rather than being able to sign up for two English classes, etc. There are many amazing and engaging teachers at ARHS in all subject areas.
Anon 8:52AM: I think, at this point, the School Committee and administrators need to look at the elementary and regional (MS and HS) budgets separately because they are two separate districts. Thus, they could increase cuts at the high school to reduce cuts at the middle school but they could not, for example, cut a librarian at one of our elementary schools to save the librarian at the middle school. There are two totally separate budgets. I do agree with you, however, that having K-12 all in the same district would offer more flexibility. The problem is that our elementary schools are an Amherst-only district and our middle and high schools are part of a regional district. Thus, the ongoing regionalization talks with Pelham, Shutesbury, and Leverett. I agree that between the budget, the disproportionate distribution of low-income students among our elementary schools, and issues such as the semester/trimester and ninth grade science at our high school (as well as getting a new superintendent), this would be a good time for a complete review of our schools.
"The cultures at Franklin Tech, Smith Voc, and PVPA are much different than that at ARHS...."
Does anyone hear in the background the philosophy of 19th century Social Darwinism?
I am sure that Anon 11:37's comment will now also be construed as "nasty."
When some folks are called on their classism and elitism their uncomfortablenss leads them to attack the messenger. Smacks of the Bush years when if you didn't agree with the Bush administraion you were somehow considered unpatriotic.
How unfortunate for all of us.
What is meant on this blog by 'classism' and 'elitism'? Are the terms synonymous with wealthy?
Anon 12:38
Would "personally attacked" have been more politically correct and to your liking? I'm not sure how I would have framed the comments "classist and elitist" and "dangerous" in a nicer way then to say they were nasty. It is one thing to disagree or to make suggestive innuendo and it is another to name call.
You sure have quite a spirited blog here, Alison!!
Anon 11:37AM: No Social Darwinism intended. I merely stated what I see as facts--every school is unique and has its own unique culture, whether it is a vo-tech school, a charter school, a comprehensive school, an elementary school, or a college. Our four elementary schools each have their unique identity and culture, for example, despite the fact that they offer essentially the same curriculum. Thus my point was that, ultimately, our high school students may choose a high school based not only on what classes are offered there but what the culture of the school may be and whether or not they can "see themselves there."
Anon 12:38PM and 2:56PM: I, too, am interested to learn the definition of "elitist" and "classist" as posted here.
Cathy C: I agree that name-calling is not productive, especially since I worry that it can cause people not to post for fear of being called names. Even so, I do believe that everyone has a right to their own opinion which is why I do not delete comments containing name-calling. But yes, a general call for civility is in order. Thank you.
Alison suggested taking a hard look at core values and I think that makes sense. In fact, I think it may be a difference in values that is leading to some of the unpleasant comments going back and forth. I think we may have different views of what education is supposed to be.
For me, education needs to be about lifelong learning. It's about flexibility and adaptability. It's not about an established canon of facts or a fixed set of skills that will quickly go out of date.
Today's children don't need a replica of the education that we had 20 or 30 years ago. Children of the 21st century need to know how to communicate, collaborate, think critically, and solve problems creatively. I believe they can learn that in a variety of settings. Elective classes are one such setting. They are not a frill or an extra. Kids may enroll in an elective class because they want to learn something specific, like how to sew or to cook or to carve a sculpture or to write a computer program. What they will really walk away with, however, is experience in planning and executing a long-term project, dealing with setbacks, and meeting specifications. I consider such experience to be central to education, not peripheral.
Forgive me here, but I went to the High School here and MOST kids did have 2 study halls every year! Actually opens back then but on the same idea. Infact, there was no teacher to check in with at all. We left campus and had total freedom.
Everyone always had study halls though. So I am not sure how much that has really changed in the last 10 years but it doesn't look to me like it has changed that much. The kids need this free time in their schedules to catch up on homework, research, or maybe just some down time.
I think it is the parents who are more outraged about this than anyone else. These study halls allow time for the kids to get their work done so they can do their sports after school, or go to work, if they need to do that. Study halls are not the end of the world and could in fact benefit most of these kids. If there is a teacher there to help with any issues that may come up, all the better!
These are tough times and we have to do what we have to do to get through this. please look more for the positives in some of these choices before making everyone one of them comletely wrong. If you have problems with any of these decisions the schools are facing, please talk to the adminstrators. Nothing will get solved on this or any other blog. The librarian is proof of this. peple made a big argument for language and not the librarian and now look at where that has gotten us. We have to give somethings up.
Also Alison, you seem to be making it sound like they are adding electives, as opposed to cutting some of the ones they currently have, is that what you are intending to say?
Nina is right...it does all come down to what you think should be the core of our high school. And clearly, everyone has a different opinion. I think Nina is right that many of our electives offer many opportunities for the critical thinking and project planning necessary in today's work force (and life), but don't think that electives have the corner on those skills. The same skills can be learned by creating a science fair project, completing a term paper in English, and designing and building a robot in science class. One of the most innovative courses in the high school might be the relatively new Integrated Math Program which is a separate math "track" offering a more integrated approach to math instruction using real-life problem-solving and cooperative learning skills.
Anon 11:02PM: I agree that study halls can be great for some kids, especially those who have demanding after-school schedules (sports, jobs, etc). I would just like to see them be optional, not required.
Not sure what you are asking in your last comment. No, I don't think they are adding elective courses. In fact, according to Tuesday night's School Committee meeting, they are cutting both elective and academic courses with low enrollment. I am just suggesting that if cuts to the curriculum need to be made, they might look first at the electives in order to spare core academics.
someone asked:
"Could we instead cut one teacher from the high school in order to retain the MS librarian?"
The high school is cutting not just one teacher, but 6.5 FTEs, which does indeed include some teachers of electives.
I don't know where people got the impression that the middle school is taking the brunt of the cuts. The high school is cutting a greater amount than the middle school. Go to this page and look for the pdf of cuts and adds:
Budget Information
Nina: I think people are concerned more at the Tier 2 and Tier 3 level of cuts. At Tier 1, the high school (as things are currently proposed) takes about twice as large a cut dollar-wise than the middle school. At Tier 2, the cut are about equal, and at Tier 3, the cuts for the middle school are larger than those at the high school. Given that the middle school is half the size of the high school, they wonder, is that appropriate?
Alison,
Please be straight with what you are actually saying here. It sounds to me that you do indeed stand for a college-bound education, which in my experience has continuosly represented a small portion of our community.
I am not saying anything here but what I have observed over more than twenty years! That is--Amherst is a bit of an elitest community. I don't think this is strictly an opinion I or others may be entitled to, but more of a fact. Come on Alsion--even you must admit it takes money to go to college. It takes more money to further your college education once you have begun because grants only fund a bachelor degree.
Parents, and this is also a fact, mostly of white upper-class status have first shot at most colleges their kids may want to go to. I am not saying the kid doesn't have any part in this as s/he needs the grades, but these grades are much easly attained when the child can rest easy each night with a warm meal and bed.
How much of this reality is ever talked about either at tm or sc meetings when decisions are being made that effect this population detrimentally?
Anon 6:33AM: I AM for a college-preparatory-level education for all students at ARHS, even those who will not choose to go to college. Who, despite what you might think, are in the minority. According to the statistics kept by the Commonwealth, 86% of our graduates go on to college, and another poster pointed out that that statistic does not include students who delay college for one year while they try to establish residency in another state in order to take advantage of lower tuition.
Of course it takes money to go to college! But many many colleges and universities, including some of the most elite in the country, practice need-blind admissions and also offer to meet full financial need of applicants. So, the best chance a student has to get into college is by being well-prepared so they can compete with students all over the country (and world) who are also vying for those slots.
Yes, you are definitely right that students have a better chance of doing well in school if they have warm food and clothes and a secure roof over their head, but no curriculum in the high school is going to address that very real issue. Our schools do offer free breakfasts and free/reduced lunch to many students in Amherst, but funding for broader social services comes out of the municipal budget line, not the school budgets. Ultimately, Town Meeting is the entity that must pass the budget, which includes what proportion of available money is going to support social services.
To Anon. 6:33 a.m.: Are you equating 'elitism' (whatever you mean by that!) with going to college? That is the worst kind of reverse snobbery I've read yet.
Anyway - for those who will not go to college the very best thing we can do is to give them a rigorous high school education. More rigorous than they're getting.
To Anon@6:33
How about you get real. Yes it takes money to go to college but it doesn't have to be from your family. There is such a thing as grants and loans (shock, young adults may actually have to invest in their future!). Myself and my 3 sisters all went to college (Bachelors and above) paid by ourselves and didn't get a cent from our parents. I teach at UMass and a lot of our students don't get $ from their families. It can be done. Would I have *liked* getting my higher ED paid for by someone else? Probably. But I got the satisfaction and the responsibility of making it worth the effort (and all those student loans!).
Anon, are you Jim Oldham?
Anon 6:33, You may have been here 20 years but you are a bit out of touch when it comes to this. Do you know any HS kids now? I have watched and known many at ARHS as they make the decision on what comes next and, thanks to good guidance, most want college. College can mean HCC or GCC too, and low income kids get a heck of alot more financial help than anyone no matter where they choose. Try being in the middle! Amherst is amazing when it comes to helping kids in need.
You make it sound like we should apologize for wanting our kids to continue their educations.
hmmm..reverse snobbery? Interesting choice of words.
Sad--the focus shouldn't be on attacking my blog, but rather facing the classist community/society we live in...
By elite I mean exclusive....I mean pampered and privileged.
I mean the average white upper class person, predominatly male.
Our schools are a social entity and it all begins here and with parents as narrowed minded as examples given, I'm glad I'm not part of the generation effected.
Abbie--a college professor? Please, what course do you teach??
Anon 8:58PM: If you are the one who accused me of being an elitist and you define elite as "I mean pampered and privileged.
I mean the average white upper class person, predominatly male," then I do not meet that definition. Although I am white.
My raised ranch off Logtown Road (you know...next to the dump) houses five children. I grew up in a 2 bedroom, 1 bath rental "townhouse" (where you could hear your neighbors sneeze through the walls) in a lower-middle-class Midwestern town. I attended a mediocre high school where I was lucky enough to have some fabulous teachers who encouraged me and allowed me to take as many academic courses as I could fit into my schedule, enabling me to trade my grades and preparation in for a scholarship to a great college. This is one of the reasons why I am so passionate about college-preparatory education for all students. In my mind, a good secondary education is a potential ticket up in the world. Even if students don't go directly on to college, this preparation will serve them not only in the workplace but also if they choose to apply to college in the future.
Anyway - for those who will not go to college the very best thing we can do is to give them a rigorous high school education. More rigorous than they're getting.I would like to hear more from the person who said this. Why do you feel that the children are not getting a rigorous high school education?
To Nina,
Because of scheduling constrains and budget constraints, the high school doesn't offer all that it might in terms of math and science courses. The same is true in the humanities. And let's not even get into the music/arts programs - if ever there is a time to pour it on, it's high school, and those classes are squeezed and reduced every year. So, what I mean by more rigorous is that the district should be beefing up its academics instead of its study hall population.
I suppose we might disagree about a definition of rigor. First, I think that there are quite a few opportunities of interesting and challenging courses for students to take, within both the academic and the elective program. Someone who is interested in math and science can take electives like Electronics, Engineering, CAD, Computer Repair, Computer Programming --all kinds of things. One of the great things about electives is that the potential for challenge is unlimited. When students work on individual projects, they can choose to take that project to any level.
Would we do more, had we more resources? Probably. But even without additional course offerings, I think it's important to look at what students do within the existing courses and then decide if those courses are challenging or not. A course does not need to be labeled Advanced Placement in order to be rigorous. Just ask the 9th graders in Honors World Civ!
I do regret that limiting students to sign up for 13 course blocks over the academic year will diminish elective enrollment. Years ago, students could potentially sign up for 16 blocks. It's definitely a loss to be down to 13.
On the other hand, that additional study block does not have to be a complete waste. For one thing, most students could in fact study more. I have had very few students who do everything they need to do in order to excel in all of their classes. They could, for example, put more time into revising their writing. A study hall would be a good place to do some peer editing. And maybe if they got more work done during the day, they would not be up at midnight doing it. It is not uncommon to receive an email from a student sent at 1am on a school night. I find that the strongest students also tend to be the busiest outside of school, and their work is often rushed.
And for the student who is truly working up to potential in all subjects, well the study hall could be a chance to read for pleasure. How many of us would love to be given an hour just to sit and read?
It isn't the college-prep students we need to worry about....if they are so blessed to be inspired by fabulous teachers than they have a great head start to a great life. It's the potential drop out and the drop outs with no where to go and nothing to do all day long, day after day, that we need to worry about.
So let's drop classism--do you even think this exists in Amherst?--and look at the groups of kids that for years now (over 26) fit the same description--being tracked off,--into the special education field in this fine system. These kids are not accepted by their peers and this begins in preschool--who do you think is responsible for this?? A classist system maybe??
Can you answer me as to why, after all these years, the description of this child fits the same description today?
Nonwhite, poor, single parented household?
I don't know how this happens, and how it is allowed to continue only that it is.
As data provided on this blog has shown, nearly all kids from Amherst go on to college. So are you really suggesting that we shouldn't pay any attention to those kids (and direct resources toward them) because they don't need our help? That would mean you think that most of the resources should be devoted to a tiny fraction of the students, which simply isn't reasonable.
Post a Comment