Comments on: AAPS Begins Superintendent Evaluation

By: Scratchingmyhead

Scratchingmyhead — Fri, 25 May 2012 16:25:53 +0000

I am so glad to see that so others appreciate Lightfoot’s activisim and approproabation.

By: fridgeman

fridgeman — Wed, 23 May 2012 20:44:50 +0000

As always, a great summary not available elsewhere. A few thoughts:

(1) Hats off to Ms. Lightfoot for her inclusive view on superintendent evaluation – though it sounds like it didn’t get anywhere at the end.

(2) This was the first I have heard the Gifted/Talented strategy articulated as “no tracking, but differentiated instruction”. In theory, I can see how DI could work. However, my experience as a parent in the district is that this rarely happens in practice at the elementary school level. Most teachers have their hands full with teaching and disciplining the “lower tier” of their classes, and simply don’t have the time to really encourage the “upper tier” to go above and beyond. This is not intended as a knock against teachers, it would be a huge challenge to manage such a range of kids. A focused Gifted/Talented program at the elementary level could benefit both the GT kids, as well as those not in the program, as teachers would have more time to dedicate to them.

(3) Schoolsmuse, I agree with you that quite likely one reason that AAPS has shied away from a dedicated Gifted/Talented program is that it could exacerbate the achievement gap. However, I don’t agree that the kids enrolled in the accelerated classes these days are primarily “white”. Middle/upper class to be sure, but many skin colors and white is not the most common.

By: schoolsmuse

schoolsmuse — Wed, 23 May 2012 01:01:26 +0000

I am surprised that the discussion of gifted and talented programs didn’t include any discussion of the achievement gap. I thought (perhaps erroneously, now I am wondering) that the reason that we don’t have a gifted and talented program in the district is because of the achievement gap. I do know that historically, the kids enrolled in the accelerated/honors/advanced classes have been primarily white and middle/upper class.

And again–although I appreciate the board’s optimism as to the use of the NWEA, I would like it if they would discuss how and when it is going to be evaluated to see if that optimism is justified.

By: A2person

A2person — Wed, 23 May 2012 00:27:44 +0000

Kate, I agree! Lightfoot has been reflecting the concerns of the community beautifully.

By: Kate

Kate — Tue, 22 May 2012 21:30:31 +0000

This article affirms my vote for Simone Lightfoot and my hope that she continues her service on the School Board. She is the only one who seems to focus on the impact that board decisions will have on economically disadvantaged populations. I am grateful that she continues to challenge her fellow trustees when their assumptions exclude this population.

By: TJ

TJ — Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:30 +0000

Differentiated instruction – something that Ann Arbor Open does well, but yet the board wants to limit who has access to it by cutting their bussing…

By: ScratchingmyHead

ScratchingmyHead — Tue, 22 May 2012 19:56:30 +0000

While I understand the necessity to have public discussions regarding board business, It amazes me that our board seems to be so confused as to how to proceed on any issue. As I sit in board meetings and then read the summary as presented by Jennifer Coffman, whom I think does an excellent job of capturing these discussions, I am as confused as ever as to how the board intends to conduct a fair and impartial evaluation of the Superintendent. This is probably one of their most important responsibility, yet no one seems to provide leadership in this area. Will keep an eye on this development.

SMH.