top of page
Search
The E3 Group

Detracking at OPRF – a tale of two stories, and the one not told last week

One story came from OPRF Asst. Superintendent Laurie Fiorenza to the school board in the form of a “Restructured Freshman Curriculum Analysis Report”.  The meeting was September 12, 2024, and the report was five pages total with two taken up by charts that could have summarized on ½ page or less.  The report used just 152 words to summarize the contractors’ 48-page report on a recent survey of students, staff, and families into detracking.    


Read Fiorenza’s report for yourself here, it takes almost no time. 


The disparity between what the OPRF administration reported out, and what the administration learned through the survey is the most recent example of how little they care about what you think of the “transformation” of OPRF.  


Fiorenza didn’t report students disagreeing (for Math, English, and History) with the statement “I believe my classes are effectively preparing me for future academic challenges”.


Fiorenza didn’t report students disagreeing with statements that detracked English: offers a challenging curriculum, captures interest and attention, instruction is paced well, or my teacher provides the support I need to be successful.


Fiorenza didn’t report students disagreeing, for all academic subjects, with the statements “things I learn are relevant to my everyday life”, or “I feel motivated to learn because I understand how material will be used”.  Student survey results begin on page 14.


And, Fiorenza did not report the obvious displeasure of OPRF families with a detracked freshman year.  For example, 30% of families described somewhat or strong disagreement with the statement “restructured freshman curriculum is a positive step toward achieving the school’s vision of equity”.  In fact, families disagreed with most statements where administrators had hoped for agreement.  Family results begin on page 30 of the consultant report. 


Sadly, Fiorenza’s report to the board attempts to disregard the seriousness of family survey results by citing the five-point scale, and frequent use of the neutral answer 3. Some might interpret neutrality as not having enough understanding, or maybe even grace in the face of tragedy.


This survey holds community answers to questions never asked by this administration. 


It was Fall 2019 when OPRF administrators told the community “You may not like it, but we’re doing it anyway”.  School board members, who have a sworn obligation to represent the will of the entire community, let this behavior go. There were plenty of opportunities to listen to Greg Johnson and Laurie Fiorenza explain their way through this experiment on kids, but never did they or the board conduct a serious inquiry into community will. 


The shallowness of the Fiorenza’s report and presentation is only outdone by the lack of good questions by school board members, questions they should have been asking had they felt the need to represent the families behind those answers. 


The streamed discussion begins at hour 1 and minute 23

 


Extra – During the discussion Fiorenza was asked whether more money could help stem the academic decline resulting from teaching to the middle; whether there should be more tutoring.  Her response included this:  "sometimes students don't know what they don't know, so how do I know to go get help, because I don't know that I don't know something".  Yes, it takes a couple tries.  Here are two sharp points to help sort through most of this word salad. 


First, this response comes from the OPRF Asst. Superintendent that advocated for less homework, fewer tests, grading floors, and an implementation of an insensitive grading scale.  It seems logical teaching to the middle would frustrate many students into disagreeing with the statement “my teacher helps me set learning goals”see page 19 in the consultant report.  


Second, OPRF has a strong history of tutoring.  It was one component of an abandoned strategy to close the achievement gap without lowering standards, and no surprise it worked.  Now, a teach-to-the-middle (ability) strategy predictably leaves some students unchallenged, and others overwhelmed.  How big this overwhelmed group is something we probably won’t know until it’s too late for hundreds of students.  We can estimate the size of this group needing tutoring from Evanston HS, the model for the transformation of OPRF.  See what happened to D’s and F’s after Evanston detracked.


As of publishing - the board meeting was streamed five days ago and only viewed 64 times.


Get the E3 newsletter version HERE



224 views

Recent Posts

See All

Comments


Commenting has been turned off.
bottom of page