Public schools are deeply flawed everywhere. Despite its bad rap, I suspect Oakland is no worse or better than the average of districts that serve a similar demographic in California.

Sadly, that average is very low.

We have a particular 3rd grade teacher who completely differentiates in her classroom and she is seen as an “outsider with a loud class.” Her students are able to work about a grade below 3rd and up to their abilities above 3rd grade, some as high as 5th grade levels.

I would love to hear from teachers why it is difficult to modify homework for kids based on their ability. For example, if you give a pre-test on a subject and the children pass with a 90% or better, why can’t they be given homework that is different from those who do not pre-test at 90%? My son’s classroom is already pre-testing to show how much they “learned.”

Also, the “group leaders” from the “Expect Success” program really seem to focus on “closing the achievement gap.” To do so, they need the advanced kids not to continue to advance so quickly. If you have students advancing 1.5 to 2 grade levels of work and other students, particularly those of color advancing 1 grade level each school year, the achievement gap becomes greater. Perhaps the measurement should be changed evaluate the student’s ability and level at the beginning of the school year and that at the end. If a child has a history of 1.5 to 2 grade levels per year that would be the expectation for that student. And EVERY student should be able to advance 1 grade level per year, minimum.

Another question, for those who might know. Title 1 schools get more money per student. I have recently visited 3 Oakland Title 1 schools. All of them have security guards at the elementary level – - – sometimes 1 guard, sometimes up to 3. Wouldn’t the student population be better served to have tutors rather than guards? All three schools had a guard that was flipping through a book, newspaper or magazine as the kids were coming in to the school in the morning, none of whom looked up to see the students coming in the door or looking at who was dropping off the students. Aren’t we setting up an expectation to the students in the security guard schools that it is not a safe place to be and security guards are more valuable than tutors?

Yes, your K experience sounds the same as ours. But this isn’t a curriculum failure. It’s a failure of the school and the district to understand that they have a duty to educate each child to the best of that child’s abilities — whether those be average abilities or advanced ones. The district has some real diamonds in its classes (as well as families who would rather stay in public school in a diverse environment if they are able to do so in good conscience), but doesn’t seem to understand the value of trying to actually educate those kids.

Again, I realize that the district has much larger issues than this one and a finite amount of resources, but shouldn’t they try to push each child to the highest level that child can achieve? Isn’t that what education is supposed to be about? Frankly, I’m not sure that the district really cares about what is going on at each school site, as long as it doesn’t cause bad headlines.

The situation at my child’s “hill” school is that the kindergarten program is very much lock-stepped. All students do the same thing at the same time, regardless of their ability level. This may work for children working to meet state standards. However for the brighter students this means that they are not challenged and forced to repeat what they already learned in preschool.

Do I blame this on the school? Absolutely

Do I blame this on the district? Absolutely

I seriously doubt that the district office staff has any clue as to what is occurring at the school sites. For instance, they had no clue that for many, many years the school was recommending upwards of 25% of the Kindergarten students to repeat K. This is absurb! AND the district office did NOT know that this was common practice at this “hills” school, at least not until this year.

Any professional teacher with the proper training and support should be able to challenge the advanced students simply be enhancing the existing curriculum, i.e., having the more advanced students write a more advanced essay — such as a page rather than a paragraph; giving a more nuanced topic to write about, etc. So, I don’t think it is the curriculum per se, I think that the downfall is much worse — it is the philosophy of the district and the schools that is at issue.

Now, I did not personally hear this, but a friend who has a bright child in one of the “good hills” schools told a group of people (including me) that when she asked the principal about programs within the school to challenge her child, the principal said, “If your child is bright and academically advanced, then your child does not belong in public school; that’s what private school is for.” Yikes.

That is precisely why my family is leaving our “hills” school. The curriculum does not challenge students.

These schools do not challenge the kids, they hothouse them for their test scores.

Whether you write a story about families moving out of Oakland due to the schools or attend private schools the results will be the same — that Oakland schools are failing our children and if this trend continues can the private schools continue to take in all of these children?