SOMA School District

In the last few weeks we have sent a few letters, made a few phone calls, paid a couple of visits and talked to other parents. What we discovered is we are not the only parents upset about how our district identifies and addresses the needs of children. At least one lawsuit has been threatened. We also discovered a heavy layer of lip service in regards to closing the well publicized achievement gap in the district. It is the district’s alleged number one priority but all that has been done is putting together a 50+ member panel to “make recommendations”. Seriously? C’mon. Does it really take that many people to screw in a light bulb? Commentor, davidfrazer, said it well:

“…I am not optimistic that a 55-member task force with a charge that, as I understand it extends for a year, will reach any sort of meaningful consensus. If experience is any guide, such task forces fall into three categories. Either they are stacked by the powers that be to justify a predetermined policy outcome or they produce a watered down “consensus” report that is of little real value (see, e.g., prior strategic planning process) or they break down into warring factions with “majority” and “minority” reports.

Call me cynical but I don’t see how the task “solves” the eqiuty and excellence conundrum on its own. What we need on this issue is not a “blue ribbon” panel. What we need is leadership.”

Why mention the gifted/talented program with the achievement gap? Because in my view they are joined at the hip. Is it not the responsibility (perhaps not sole) of the school system to prepare our children for academic achievement and raise each child’s educational expectations? SOMA seems settled on dumbing down educational expectations instead of raising them. This is best exemplified in the rate of participation in advanced level courses by students according to ethnicity/race (link: page 10). White students participate in these courses at a rate of almost five times that of Black students. SOMA seems to just shrug it’s institutional shoulders when questioned how to address the issue.

Perhaps the solution is simple. SOMA should focus on more participation in preparatory/advanced classes across groups, potentially raising student scores on standardized tests across those groups, and as a result the achievement gap will be un-gapped. By not doing this, how many Jack and Jill Student is SOMA underserving and miseducating? But in order for SOMA to un-gap the gap, it must properly identify children who show academic promise and address their needs. When contemplating this issue, I first thought the district’s definition of a gifted and talented child needed to be expanded. But when I read how the district characterizes those children (listed below), I changed my mind. It is:

The characteristics of exceptionally able learners (why not just called these kids “gifted and talented”?) may include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Show a high degree of intellectual, creative, and/or artistic ability and demonstrate this ability in multiple ways;
• Intense curiosity about principles and how things work;
• The ability to grasp concepts rapidly and/or intuitively;
• The ability to generate theories and hypotheses and pursue methods of injury;
• Pose questions beyond those present in the regular District curriculum;
• Make connections;
• Produce products that express insight, creativity, and/or excellence, and;
• Possess exception leadership skills.

Clearly, measuring the above characteristics is a highly subjective pursuit, but I would say the definition is pretty well thought out. So it must be SOMA’s identification method that is flawed. This brings me to the purpose of this post. I ask, if you have read this far, please share what methods you would use to identify children who possess the above traits? Please share the first thing that comes to mind in the comments.

Shout out to Lauryn Hill and Carter G. Woodson.

T-One Hard At Work

Earlier this school year I received T-One’s NJ ASK scores which test elementary school age children in NJ in language arts and math. The scores are grouped into three categories: “partially proficient” (which is just a pc way to say that the child scored below standard), “proficient” and “advanced proficient”. T-One scored at the upper end of the “proficient”. I must admit when I saw the scores I was both a little surprised and a little disappointed. The girl does so many things so well and things seem to come so naturally to her that it comes as a small shock when she’s deemed “average” at anything.

Of course as parents we think our kids are extraordinary at everything, both good and bad. In my mind, no kid is a better athlete than T-One, no kid is more creative than C-Thunda and no kids are more beautiful than either of them. There’s also the flip side. No kids get into more mischief or are as sassy or are as hair-grayingly maddening as my children. They are extraordinary in every way. But average they ain’t. At least, in my mind.

So when I opened the envelope containing T-One’s NJ ASK scores, I was a little baffled. How could T-One not have gotten a perfect score let alone a score in the higher category? I was taking her score personally as if the test makers somehow singled her out and purposely gave her questions she wasn’t prepared for. As irrational as that sounds, that’s how I felt. Knowing how standardized tests are used to essentially categorize and dissect young people into the intelligence haves and have-nots, I was defensive and a little angry. How dare they label her as merely average. They clearly must have lost their minds!

My own mind moved quickly to how those average scores would affect this not even close to average kid. Would she believe the hype thinking she was nothing special, just run of the mill? Would she be forever labeled? Would she be kept out of the proverbial reindeer games or worse, Harvard? My mind ran rampant. Even though I knew the real deal – that standardized test scores are BULLSHIT, it didn’t ease my worry at all. And it wasn’t long before my fears were realized.

Not long after I received the scores T-One’s school announced over the school’s loudspeaker that those children who scored highly on the NJ ASK would be invited to enter gifted and talented classes in language arts and math. T-One reported each child’s name was called in a (deservedly) congratulatory tone. Except, she explained, her name wasn’t among those called. I asked her how she felt about that and she said, “I felt dumb.” My heart sank. I tried to make her feel better about the situation but I wasn’t very persuasive.

T-One is definitely a competitor. She wants to be the best at what she does. But sometimes we (those that love her) have to help her with eliminating doubtful and negative self talk. Beyond helping her feel better about the situation was seeing what could be done about getting her into those classes. It doesn’t seem right to keep a bright kid from doing her best or being challenged to her utmost. I mean, there is no doubt she is “gifted and talented”, even by the state of NJ’s definition:

The regulations (N.J.A.C. 6A:8-3.1) define gifted and talented students as: Those students who possess or demonstrate high levels of ability, in one or more content areas, when compared to their chronological peers in the local district and who require modification of their educational program if they are to achieve in accordance with their capabilities.

It goes on to say that:

Local school districts must use multiple measures to identify students [as gifted and talented].

Wait a second. Multiple measures? Seems the school based their decision on a solitary measure and a inferior one at that. They didn’t take into consideration her near perfect performance in class, the 10 or so novels (yes, novels) she’s written, they didn’t consider that the work they send home is so easy for her she finishes it in less than 5 minutes most days, and that she does all while being committed to several after school activities along with the unfortunate inconvenience of being ushered between two homes. And they certainly didn’t account for her creativity and willingness to work hard. Seems to me this particular school district would go above and beyond to identify and nurture talent like T-One’s else risk perpetuating an already embarrassing and shameful condition.

Of course, there is the chance all this can be corrected by making the simple request she be invited to the classes. But I wanted to vent first. The whole ordeal had me wondering if she is really being challenged at her school or is she simply fading into the background. Getting lost in a sea of young faces. I hope that is not the case. In any regard, I will be counseling with the key folks of her school and making them aware of her gifts and talents they obviously overlooked.

However, when I really think about it, my regard for privacy has not served me the way I expected or wanted. In some ways it has hurt me. To exercise privacy requires the active withholding of some information. The upside is you prevent people from judging your every nook and cranny. Get out of there! This is why diaries used to have locks. But there is a downside to being private. Inevitably, the private person allows room for others to implant or supplement a false reality about you, your feelings, your abilities and your intentions where there is a lack of information. While many times this may have no consequence on your life, in many ways I’ve found it to be detrimental in my life. Especially in my personal relationships.

I’ve been called mysterious, sneaky, someone with an agenda, up to something and the like just because I did not wish to disclose every aspect of my life. This couldn’t be further from the truth. I am not mysterious or sneaky or anything else. I’m just private. My thoughts are mine, my ideas are mine, my feelings are mine. Mine! Mine! Mine! I do not wish to share it all. What I do share I feel is enough of a representation of me that you can get to know the “who” of who I am. With the things that I don’t share, I am just simply more comfortable having an internal dialogue with myself about those things. I don’t want you to know. Mind your business!

But here’s the thing. I know I’m fighting a losing battle. Privacy in this world is becoming elusive if not yet non-existent. We are living in a world moving toward being an open-book society.  Diaries don’t have locks anymore. People blog about their kids and their personal lives online (eh-hem). I know the intimate details of Paris Hilton’s sex life because reality-TV is so big. You’re seen as particularly suspicious if you don’t have a Facebook page. God forbid you don’t answer your cell phone within the first Jonas Brothers ringtone. People expect access to you at all times. Not to mention the government has established laws that allow them (and you) to rifle through my cyber garbage to find out who I texted, who I called, who I emailed, what I bought, what I viewed, where I traveled, who I was with and what that thing really was that was growing on my back from my formerly private medical records. With two, sometimes just one piece of information you can, sometimes for a small fee, find out almost everything you need to know about a person. Some of it true, some of it not.

Privacy as we once knew it is dead!

Today, I went back and reread part of Thomas Friedman’s book, The World Is Flat 3.0. Friedman writes in a section called “Flattener #9: In-Forming”,

“There is another side to in-forming that people are going to have to get used to, and that is other people’s ability to in-form themselves about you from a very early age. Search engines flatten the world by eliminating all the valleys and peaks, all the walls and rocks, that people used to hide inside of, atop, behind, or under in order to mask their reputations or parts of their past. In a flat world, you can’t run, you can’t hide, and smaller and smaller rocks are turned over. Live your life honestly, because whatever you do, whatever mistakes you make, will be searchable one day.”

This new reality that Friedman speaks of plus the fact that I have had enough situations where being private allowed people to draw false conclusions about me are two of the reasons that have lead me to start Big Piece of Chicken. In a searchable world, I’d rather promote the truth about me and reveal my own skeletons than to have someone else do it for me. Or worse yet, get my facts wrong. Really, I am still that private person wanting to tell you to mind your business. But I realize I live in an open-book world and privacy is met with suspicion.

But since the blog launched I have struggled with how un-private I can and should be. I have contemplated this question with myself. I was also affected by an unfortunate event that recently turned ugly in a personal relationship due to the blog. I have solicited the advice of E.Payne on the subject. I have read and contemplated Heather B. Armstrong’s views on revealing personal information. And I have reread Friedman’s book today. With all, I have come up with the following. Below is a doodle I did in my local ‘Bucks.

The Iceberg of Me

Basically it’s like this.

If I just give you tip of the iceberg stuff, you’ll be bored and I’ll be bored. Who cares. So what. Who cares what kind of toothpaste I used today. (Crest Pro-Health) I can give you more than that, just under the surface stuff, like my views on life. But you’ll get bored eventually and I’ll run out of things to say. I’m not going to tell you the things I wouldn’t tell my therapist. And I’m definitely not going to tell you the things that materialize from the Abyss of My Soul. That’s a place I want to pretend doesn’t exist.

But I think there is this middle space where I can be open-book and not feel like I’m giving away the farm. Although I am not comfortable in this area and still don’t know quite how to do it, I will try to operate there and at least in the other two top tiers of the “Iceberg of Me” both on this blog and in my personal life.

Don’t worry. If you’re reading this and I hold some dark secret of yours, I won’t be telling. But I may reveal some of my own. Let’s see if this more revealing me serves me better than the one who is so private.