Signatures 246 total
-
1
Name: Keith Camhi on Oct 6, 2009Comments: I remain baffled by the lack of interest by the administration to replicate best practices from Westover, which may well be not just a local success story but a model for the nation on how to do flexible ability grouping in a very heterogeneous district.Flag
-
2
Name: Jannette Stern on Oct 7, 2009Comments: I am very concerned for our high achieving students who have parents who have put the time and effort into helping their children succeed. These are highly motivated students, who if put into mixed groups, where academic grouping will no longer be available, will ultimately be the ones to suffer. Teachers cannot teach to a range of students starting in middle school from low academic to high academic, it does not make sense. I realize that the purpose is to bring up scores and to bring the level of learning for those students on the lower spectrum, but that should not be done at the expense of our high performing students whose scores will eventually start to falter from not grouping according to ability. I am fortunate that my children our now in high school and no longer affected by these decisions, but I do feel so strongly for those still in that situation. If my children were still in middle school and this non grouping was passed, I would consider private school on an absolute basis.Flag
-
3
Name: Jill Chuckas on Oct 7, 2009Comments: Dear Members of the School Board and Superintendent Starr: As a parent of 2 children in the Stamford City Schools and a third child soon to enter kindergarten, I am deeply concerned regarding middle school reforms that would incorporate heterogeneous ability groupings throughout the middle school curriculum. Having worked previously as a social worker in the Milford Public Schools for 10 years at both the elementary and middle school levels, I feel particularly knowledgeable of a variety of teaching techniques that work and do not work, in schools. I am of the opinion that there are academic tasks that require children to be grouped with others of like ability. While I appreciate the needs of all students, both low and high functioning, as well as everyone in between, to have learning experiences with others who may be differently-abled than themselves, I feel that in the core subject areas (math and reading), children need to be taught directly to their ability. My children tend to be on the high end of the academic spectrum. In the second grade at Springdale this year, the school decided not to group children for their reading program as they had in previous years. Also, there is an across school curriculum in Math that “wraps” around learning. My son generally “gets it” the first time around, while most in the class need multiple repetitions prior to learning the skill. His teacher has worked hard to provide him with enrichment activities, but he finds himself bored throughout many lessons. He is a leader in the class, so he often assists other children in their learning process. He is reading well beyond grade level, but often does not receive direct instruction in this area because many other students require the teacher’s constant attention. I do not fault his teacher in this instance. I fully believe that she is offering him every opportunity for success available. But, the academic environment does not afford him the support that he requires. And, Stamford no longer has an enrichment program. My reason for this example is that I feel my child will not reach his full academic potential if he is not grouped in higher academic level classes with like ability peers. His pace will constantly be slowed down. Without proper teacher training and adequate in classroom support both high and low achieving students will falter. Heterogeneous grouping is more appropriate in social studies and science curriculums where it is easier for teachers to utilize special projects and assignments for more abled students. Also, I would suggest that both special educators and regular classroom teachers employ more team teaching techniques throughout the curriculum. This allows the special educator to directly implement teaching techniques within the classroom, supporting all students, while the regular educator can teach the general curriculum and enrichment activities. Thank you for your consideration on this issue. I am hopeful that the City of Stamford Schools will give this issue the extreme consideration it deserves. Sincerely, Jill K. Chuckas, MSWFlag
-
4
Name: Andrea Reilly on Oct 7, 2009Comments:Flag
-
5
Name: Jacqueline DOnofrio on Oct 7, 2009Comments:Flag
-
6
Name: Claudia Rimerman on Oct 14, 2009Comments: This is a hugely important issue. I hope the candidates are reading this group wall. So much of the literature reinforces what common sense and a few years of parenting teaches: children learn best in a group of their peers. No one wins when some kids are frustrated and others are bored. The key is to provide the right level of instruction and a group of children who can challenge and support one another. Too broad a range of abilities in a group will dilute the message; support among the students dwindles and conflict arises. Furthermore, the teacher will also become frustrated, not reaching her pupils. The Board of Ed must reconsider such a challenging course of action. It is not the right choice for our children. Claudia Rimerman Mother of 3 public school studentsFlag
-
7
Name: Heidi Lockwood on Oct 14, 2009Comments:Flag
-
8
Name: Lisa Rankin on Oct 14, 2009Comments:Flag
-
9
Name: Norma Kraut on Oct 14, 2009Comments:Flag
-
10
Name: Cathy Lueders on Oct 14, 2009Comments:Flag
-
11
Name: Stephanie Bilenker on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
12
Name: Jennifer Rondano on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
13
Name: Anonymous on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
14
Name: Irene Kelley on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
15
Name: Lori Baden on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
16
Name: Allison Greenbaum on Oct 15, 2009Comments: Keep grouping, it works.Flag
-
17
Name: Bob Rondano on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
18
Name: Kristi Svec on Oct 15, 2009Comments:Flag
-
19
Name: Nana Adae on Oct 16, 2009Comments: Grouping should continueFlag
-
20
Name: Herm Alswanger on Oct 17, 2009Comments:Flag
-
21
Name: Myrna Alswanger on Oct 17, 2009Comments:Flag
-
22
Name: Amy Essenfeld on Oct 17, 2009Comments: My children will not directly be affected by the middle school reform yet I am passionate about the need to institute flexible ability grouping in the middle schools. It is the best way to educate and stimulate children at all levels. Without this shift, house values in Stamford will decline and the children will be cheated out of the education they all deserve. There are many methods to close the achievement gap but heterogeneous grouping is NOT one of them.Flag
-
23
Name: Diane Arditti on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
24
Name: Ken Temple on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
25
Name: Barbara Jacobs on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
26
Name: Debbie Gershon on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
27
Name: Melissa & Ken Broder on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
28
Name: Heidi Ganz on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: Heidi Ganz on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
30
Name: Anonymous on Oct 18, 2009Comments:Flag
-
31
Name: Keith Camhi on Oct 18, 2009Comments: I support Polly, Jerry and Lorraine, and I concur with the content of keepgrouping.org. While many of the changes in the schools are positive, dramatic expansions in heterogeneous grouping is not.Flag
-
32
Name: Michael Schechter on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
33
Name: Miriam Schechter on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
34
Name: Amy Essenfeld on Oct 19, 2009Comments: We need BOE members that will challenge the administration when they are implementing programs that are not in the best interest of all our children. Pia, Olson and Rauh are the ones that will do this.Flag
-
35
Name: Christine Papadakis-Kanaris on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
36
Name: Christine Papadakis-Kanaris on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
37
Name: Susan Garufi on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
38
Name: Julie Rakowitz on Oct 19, 2009Comments: As an educator, I have never seen heterogeneous grouping that addresses the top students. It is always a middle of the road presentation of curriculum and the students at the top are short changed.Flag
-
39
Name: Julie Rakowitz on Oct 19, 2009Comments: As an educator, I have never seen heterogeneous grouping that addresses the top students. It is always a middle of the road presentation of curriculum and the students at the top are short changed.Flag
-
40
Name: Alan Stockman on Oct 19, 2009Comments: This is not just about ability grouping. It is about providing opportunities for the range of needs that Stamford children have.Flag
-
41
Name: Alan Stockman on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
42
Name: Shelley Zielinski on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
43
Name: Nicole Zussman on Oct 19, 2009Comments: I strongly support Rauh, Pia and Olsen because they understand our Stamford community and the need to provide an education that CHALLENGES all of our students - top, middle and bottom.Flag
-
44
Name: Kristin Branson-Cerasoli on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
45
Name: Anonymous on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
46
Name: Rebecca Bleiman on Oct 19, 2009Comments: I think it is very important to group by ablity. My child, Olivia Martinez is in the upper end of the class and she has been in several classes where she is not grouped and I see that she looses interested because the informationis not challenging enough.Flag
-
47
Name: Anonymous on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
48
Name: David Greenberg on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
49
Name: Sue And Ed Greenberg on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag
-
50
Name: Meredith Scheine on Oct 19, 2009Comments:Flag