This article is so misleading. It regurgitates the flawed, biased and admittedly non-causal report produced by the schools and district administrators who desired and implemented the change in the first place with no prior Board policy vote or broad community input. What could go wrong?

The Students First group of 700+ students, teachers, parents & community members, of which I'm one, is frustrated by the continued lack of transparency and failed representation of its constituents. We deserve real data with objective and fair-balanced analysis, but that's not what we got in this report. If one really understands what's going on at our schools, one will see the report's subjective, cherry-picked and flawed endpoints:

- grades improving (thank you grade inflation and standards-based grading)
- increased enrollment in AP (oh, but not among the underrepresented, what does one expect when you remove Honors?, is unintentionally inducing students to load up with 3-5 AP classes in a given year - whether they're able to handle it or not - a good outcome?)
- with improved AP exam scores (thank you, private tutors!).

The only objective scores included in the report show flat or decreasing state testing scores.

Congratulations, administrators. Yes - let's definitely keep this program that, in blending college prep and honors levels in our district - with likely one of the broadest spectrums in the U.S. of students' 9th grade readiness - is over- or under-challenging the majority of students, most of all those it's intended to help. The result may even be an increase in the achievement gap - presumably (if not clearly) the issue for which the district was trying to solve - with students increasingly polarized between College Prep & AP with no middle Honors ground.

Web Link

The link above didn't say what it's for - SUHSD Students First web site which has more information about the situation.

I watched the meeting, read the report, talked to my son and some of his teachers, and feel good about what's happening at M-A. I'd be happy to talk to any local families about our experience.

We are 2-3 years into an experiment in which M-A kids from racially/economically segregated districts take some of the same intro-level academic classes together (not all – e.g. freshman who were on the compacted math track in middle school can take honors geometry or algebra II). I've yet to see any objective measure showing that these changes have definitively harmed students at either end of the academic spectrum. In aggregate, most metrics are trending in a positive direction.

For example, while M-A is not yet seeing a change in the number of kids from low-income backgrounds who are taking AP courses, more kids are now taking and passing algebra and biology, which is putting them on track to go to college. That's an improvement. Despite complaints that smart kids aren't being challenged, M-A has more students enrolling in AP courses than before and they are doing as well on the standardized AP exams (an objective measure). And the district has said explicitly that they do not plan to reduce the remaining AP/honors courses. (M-A actually has 5 more than they did a decade ago.)

The M-A principal also shared that they are seeing encouraging changes in the student experience – fewer disciplinary referrals and 504 plan requests. Whether or not these are causally connected to the modest curriculum changes doesn't much matter to me. What I see at M-A is a school that is getting more kids eligible for college, serving up an impressive array of advanced courses, and experiencing fewer documented behavioral challenges. The principal and teachers stood up and said that they feel the curriculum changes are working and I support them.

SUHSD AP/honors trends: Web Link
Math at M-A: Web Link
APs at M-A: Web Link

The article is misleading as it mentions that many parents and students spoke in favor of reinstating honors classes. I sat in the meeting and most if not ALL the parents and students spoke in favor of reinstating honors classes, while all teachers spoke in favor of "detracking". What I found appalling is the way the parents and most importantly the students are being portrayed: as privileged. The brave students from all rounds of life who took the time to speak up in front of their teachers and sharing their concerns and stating their opinion. This should be respected and encouraged. The admin and teachers who pointed a finger and made disrespectful comments towards those students should be ashamed of themselves. This is a community debate, about curriculum in a public school not a political debate putting forward misguided ideology. We are talking about the education of the kids within our community.
Second issue is the report itself: as clearly mentioned "...and that with academic rigor, the study could have taken many months to complete." The report lacks objectivity (it was written with the district) and solid data - it has been requested that the data be made available for a more comprehensive analysis and it was denied. The data should be analyzed by an external third party.
Thirdly, I was so impressed by Jacob Yuryov, the student trustee who spoke during board comments. He was prepared, had done his research and had actually reached out to the people the most impacted about this: the students! And as mentioned, it was a "resounding yes" - students want honors back, they want options, they want to be able to make the choice. The teachers and administrators seem to believe they know better, but have they actually listened to their constituents: the students?? I believe that we are all working towards a similar goal, ensuring the success of all the kids, but that means empowering them with opportunities and choices, enabling them to define their paths.

I also watched the meeting. Truth be told, I faded a bit after midnight, but I was there for all of the comments. One interesting thing I noted: Most (if not all, but I steer clear of absolutes unless I'm certain) of the students who spoke were not currently enrolled in the heterogeneous classes, so they were making assumptions about the rigor or lack thereof based on an experience that was different. I didn't hear any current 9th or 10th graders chime in about whether they liked them or not. I think student voice is important, but given the data that the district provided after a notably limited study span, it seems these opinions about what is happening in the classes (or not) are just opinions - not data. I am encouraged by what the district shared and I hope they continue to pursue this path as it is will help in the necessary work of making wildly disparate home lives find common ground in school. Thank you Sequoia Union High School District for having the bravery to pursue this path. We all know volume doesn't equate to accuracy and our elected officials should dig a lot deeper before taking steps to make changes based on uninformed opinions. Think about who you didn't hear from and go find out what they think. That is the work.

What is missing in this discussion is any data or real world experience beyond what is, arguably, a very self referential study. The study is small scale, and those evaluating it are the ones who both are the strongest proponents of eliminating honors and in some cases have the most to gain professionally from the implementation. Beyond Student trustee Jacob Yuryev's very thorough analysis of the flaws and possible biases in the report, we have the real world experiences of San Francisco Unified School district, the Culver City High School, and others. In the case of SF, a simple google search will provide numerous counter views, showing the harm done to high achieving kids, the extra costs incurred by parents who need workarounds for their kids to be competitive at top universities, and concerns that the data to justify the change is flawed and biased. More concerning are test score results that show proficiency is lost and in fact racial achievement gaps have actually increased as access to advanced classes are basically denied to SED students. Moreover, those results are supported by a Stanford University report that has found the same conclusions.

Another thing District parents need to consider, while a subset of educators and consultants are pushing this program, it is being vehemently opposed by the very university professors who see the results. Again, all of this discussion is publicly available online for anyone, particularly the board, admin’s and journalists following this debate. To not look at and evaluate the whole data set and impacts does a disservice to our parents and kids. The bottom line, at least in math, a large set of professors state clearly that this approach is leaving our children unprepared for meaningful careers in STEM.

This article is missing critical data and evaluation and presents an incomplete and biased picture of the current trajectory of eliminating honors as it impacts the education of all our children.

Stanford University professor Brian Conrad has carefully studied what California is doing with its math curriculum and eliminating advanced courses. It is not good.

You can read more in The Atlantic and his website:
Web Link

Web Link

@carlmont cares, Tom Dee's research on San Francisco's math curriculum, while interesting, is irrelevant to SUHSD. To imply otherwise betrays a fundamental misunderstanding about what our district is doing and what one can and can't actually extrapolate from research. (Those who are interested in Dee's study can read more here: Web Link )

SUHSD, unlike San Francisco, hasn't eliminated honors math classes or delayed algebra until 9th grade – nor are they planning to do so. What they HAVE done is make algebra the default freshman math course for freshmen *who haven't yet taken it*. The rest of the math curriculum (honors geometry through multivariable calculus) remains unchanged.

As it happens, Tom Dee is ALSO working on an evaluation of the SUHSD Math Initiative. The research team expects to finish their paper in a few weeks but preliminary results that they shared with the board were encouraging. Web Link

Meanwhile a slew of teachers and principals shared both data and "real world experience" at the board meeting. Why would the opinions of these experienced educators be less valid than those of an 8th grader who stands up and implores the district to "bring back AP courses" that were never taken away? or a parent who admitted he hadn't read the report? I also heard a lot of complaining that the district didn't provide data supporting the claim that "academically inclined" students were being harmed. What metrics would one collect to make that determination? Students reporting that they are bored in 9th grade and stressed in 11th grade? (compared to what measurable counterfactual?) Parents threatening to put their kids in private school b/c they heard a rumor that the district canceled math or APs and now there's brain drain? How does this square with the significant increase in AP course enrollment and AP test scores? It doesn't.

@kbehroozi When you say that "SUHSD, unlike San Francisco, hasn't eliminated honors math classes or delayed algebra until 9th grade – nor are they planning to do so." Are you saying that you agree that math honors should not be eliminated in the future? If you want to keep math honors in the future, why are you okay with honors English being eliminated? If you do not want to keep math honors in the future, then you should not be dismissing people's slippery slope concerns that math could be next. As a parent, I am experiencing firsthand how unprepared my sophomore is this year in AS English 2 without having the benefit of AS English 1 as compared to my other child who did. I have witnessed a decay in the quality of education. I agree that the AP classes are fantastic, but the prep is now lacking which means more private tutors are required to be prepared which no one seems to acknowledge or like to talk about. Kids moving to private high schools is not a threat - it is reality. And it is happening even more now that parents are becoming aware of this issue. Lastly, public letters were written by the English, social science and math teachers and heads of the departments at Carlmont advocating for keeping honors so not all teachers believe in it. And many other teachers that also feel the same way will not say so publicly.

Local Resident, it sounds like one of your kids got a great 9th grade English teacher and was well prepared for future English courses. We can hope that teacher is now teaching MCLV. But every kid is different, every teacher is different, and I don't think individual experiences (as expressed in public comment) are a solid basis for district- or school-wide policy choices – not when we have actual data and faculty who see a broad range of kids and outcomes. I know that the AS English II teachers acknowledged a transition period at the beginning of the year for sophomores, but they also said that the kids caught up quickly. The transition from a general course to an honors course is going to be a step up any time you do it – whether from 8th to 9th grade (which is what used to happen) or from 9th to 10th. (My friend's kid only got one B at M-A and that was in AS English I.) M-A does pour a lot of resources into after-school tutoring and I'm not sure how many people take advantage of it. If extensive tutoring is required and kids are overly stretched/stressed, perhaps NOT taking honors everything is an option to consider.

Re: math, I am content with the status quo in the district and have expressed that. I would not be happy if the district evolved in the direction that San Francisco has (pushing algebra back to 9th grade for everyone). I'm also not happy with the inferences that I've heard from Students First that our district has diluted or dumbed down the math curriculum (or is planning to do so). They haven't done so; they've averred that they don't plan to do so; and given that our high school district pulls from so many different elementary districts, I don't even see how that would be feasible. But people who are worried about this should feel free to contact the district and confirm their intent for the math curriculum.

The headline is more informative than the rest of the article. Simply put, the families and students want the eliminated courses to be reinstated, and the administrators and teachers do not want to reinstate them.

The rest of the article leaves out key facts, like that the author of the study does not even claim that the results are causal. The administrators admit that they did many things differently during this time period, like advocating for kids to enroll in advanced classes in later years. It is beyond irresponsible to claim that the "heterogenous" classes were the cause of any increased enrollments. And this writer should have noted that there was no causality, especially when quoting people who claimed there was. Such a shame that people will get the wrong idea by reading this article.

At the end of the day, the question is: who is in charge? The board is responsible for how this is resolved, and they are accountable to the voters. Would they rather have the votes of the of subset teachers/administrators who live in the district, or would they rather have the votes of the vast, vast majority of families that oppose the elimination of honors classes?

kbehroozi,

Two of my children took Honors English (AS English) as 9th graders, and one did not. The two courses are not interchangeable and this is not simply a situation in which a great 9th-grade English teacher is now free to teach any honors-level curriculum to all first-years. (I write this as a teacher myself.) The texts used are more complex, the expectations are higher, and the courses start and end in different places. For two of my children, the accelerated 9th grade course absolutely better prepared them with the skills to take on AP Lit/ Lang. My child who did not take the course in 9th did still take AP Lit/Lang, but was not as well prepared and struggled more.

It is wonderful that your son is content with the changes at the high school. Others are not, and they very much want the option to challenge themselves in ELA.

I do think you might be interested in looking at Stanford mathematics professor Brian Conrad's analysis of what California is planning to do with mathematics. Links in the prior post.

"Simply put, the families and students want the eliminated courses to be reinstated, and the administrators and teachers do not want to reinstate them."

Again, I don't think this is a fair assertion. Some families and students apparently want these courses reinstated. Others support the goals of the district, are comfortable with the status quo, and/or willing to let this experiment play out. Others might like to see the district go further in the direction of eliminating honors courses (I'm not in this camp, and I didn't get the sense that the administration or the board members are there either). And a whole bunch of people out there are simply going about their lives, putting food on the table and doing their jobs and taking care of their families and trusting the teachers and educational leaders to do their jobs.

Please don't imagine that you speak for everyone.

@kbehroozi I'm not claiming to speak for others; I'm just emphasizing that the headline is the most accurate part of the article. If you counted the number of families who asked the board to reinstate the honors courses and compared that to the number of families who asked for the classes not to be reinstated, you would have to agree that the vast, vast majority of them were in the former camp. And as the student board observer noted, some of those asking for the courses to be reinstated were from SED families.

As @localteacher said, no one is trying to stop you from letting your kids choose what classes to take. Please extend the same courtesy to our kids.

Another potential outcome is that families who can afford to send their children to private schools which support Honors courses or accelerated learning will do so. Other families may decide to hire private tutors to meet their children's and/or families wishes for differentiated learning.

But if families leave the public school system or hire tutors, who suffers? Declining enrollment, potential loss of state funding, reductions in faculty, teachers with experience teaching Honors/AP courses leaving for other schools - these are not unlikely possibilities. The end result (potentially) is further separation by income and demographic measures.

Meet the needs of all of your families and keep public schools viable.

@BetsyRoble This is what we have heard parents talking about. One of them pointed out that the families that can afford private schools are probably also more likely to be notable donors than the families that cannot afford to leave. So even if only a small percentage of families leave, their departure could have a big impact on district finances.

At the same time, those who stay in the district may also become less generous, as a result of dissatisfaction with the administration.

If I were on the school board I probably wouldn't worry too much about the threat of losing a critical mass of kids to Menlo/Nueva/Sacred Heart because I had stopped offering differentiated learning for three entry-level courses (any more than I'd worry about depleting the quality of UCLA or Berkeley because some people want to send their kids to Princeton).

The private schools around here that offer a more intense 9th grade year are expensive (often $50K/year or more) and quite hard to get into due to much smaller class sizes.

M-A, meanwhile, is free, and they accept everyone.

And the students at M-A are impressive. Approximately 130 kids took AP World History last year at M-A and 60% of them got 5s on the AP exam. The number of M-A sophomores taking AP World History last year (despite no honors track freshman year) would basically fill the entire sophomore class at Menlo or Nueva. Nearly 100 M-A kids took AP Chem last year (despite no AS Chem class) and something like 80% of them passed the AP exam.

Are people really trying to argue that M-A doesn't offer effective advanced learning options for their numerous smart and motivated students?

I buy most of my groceries at Trader Joe's and have for years. Every once in a while they introduce a killer product that I become attached to (e.g. pink grapefruit marmalade), and then it goes away. It's a bummer. But they offer so many other good products, and the price is right – so I haven't switched to doing all my shopping at Draeger's. I'm assuming other people operate similarly because Trader Joe's in Menlo Park is thriving. So, despite the existence of expensive alternatives, is M-A.

I have two students. One graduated in the class of 2023, and one is a current junior. My older student had AS English 1 as a freshman, and AS Chemistry as a sophomore. Having taken AS English 1, he felt prepared for AS English 2 and AP Lang and and AP Lit. My current junior reports that during his freshman year (in Multi- Cultural Literature and Voice) all comments and observations about the text were welcomed and applauded. Now in AP Lang - there are incorrect answers. In other words, the teacher demands more analysis and does not validate every student's interpretation. He would be better prepared if he had the opportunity to be more challenged freshman year. When discussing the AP Chemistry scores last year, it is important to realize seniors (who had the benefit of AS Chemistry) also took this class and test. In addition the bump in scores was not unique to M-A. The scores increased nationally in 2023, with the highest number of students receiving a 4 or 5 in all the years reported (since 2011). Web Link

The article quotes a history teacher at M-A. I am having trouble following her quotes because freshman history at M-A has not been tracked. So there was no change to the tracking for freshman history. Last year M-A offered sophomores AP World History instead of AP European History. It's not clear what AP scores the teacher is comparing given last year was the first year AP World History was offered.

@kbehroozi

If you were a School Board member, I hope that you would vote to enact policies that reflect the desires of your constituents since that is the role and duty of School Board members.

You did not answer my question about why you are okay with eliminating honors English 1 but don’t want math to change.

There are many other private schools in the area other the ones that you mention. These are large schools that cost half as much as the ones you are referencing and also offer a lot of scholarships. They are also very diverse with many students from all over the peninsula.

And yes, I am exactly arguing that the school is not providing "advanced learning" for freshmen, and I have experienced it firsthand with my kids. They are not being met where they are. The issue at hand is the downward trajectory of the local public education system, not that it is okay for it to deteriorate since it is a quasi-monopoly.

Comparing the availability of a challenging and appropriate academic experience to the availability of grapefruit marmalade. Wow.

Kids only do high school once, and their experience sets them up for success in college and beyond. Dumbing down the curriculum, though politically correct according to the most vocal virtue signalers, ultimately benefits no one -- which is why tracking was originally created, not because educators are racist!

If our local private schools had more capacity, you'd see an exodus of students from the SUHSD. And with those kids would go all the parents who run the PTA, the Foundations, and extras like the fashion show. No coincidence that they are from the same families.

An issue I haven't seen addressed in the comments is how much the presence of honors classes in 9th grades causes de facto segregation. Reinstating a program that is known to result in this should be a problem for more people. M-A has a long long long reputation as two schools within a school. They are trying something new that appears to be moving the needle on this problem. Perhaps we should refocus the conversation to how M-A is going to continue it's work to be one community where kids treat those different from them with the same kind of respect they treat those who are the same. That isn't how it was operating before these changes.

@Dawn1234 Eliminating honors has not move the needle on the issue you are describing. I have not seen kids hanging out together in different groups because of the elimination of honors. Thinking it has is very theoretical and not the reality.

@Local Resident
The staff report I saw seemed to indicate some shifts in who is choosing to take more challenging courses later in high school, which does start to move the needle on the segregation created through tracking. It will take time for teens to start changing their social groups. But, learning how to be in a class with others from different cultural or economic backgrounds and treat them respectfully is part of how we start that shift. So far, the data seems to support the change and I'm mostly hearing "feelings" about not having the option, but little experience in not having it. I didn't hear from kids currently in those classes during public comment and I found that curious.

Lets see if college acceptance rates change at all in the next few years before we decide it's harming anyone.

The Wall Street Journal covered what is happening with the elimination of classes at MA-HS in an article this week. What is becoming more clear is that parents and students (and taxpayers) seem to have close to zero say in the elimination of advanced classes for their children. Indeed, SUHSD Board member Carrie Du Bois responded to the SUHSD Students First organization's concerns admitting that the Board did not seem to understand that these classes would be eliminated (someone from SUHSD Students First-- is my interpretation of her letter to your organization correct?). That is concerning as it indicates that the public has no say and no recourse. It seems as though the teachers and administrators have all decision-making authority, and perhaps the Board members were at best, unclear, and at worst, misled.

@local teacher. You are correct. Here is the exact quote from the current Board of Trustee (the Students First group had shared this to their email list): "Thank you for this letter to the board of trustees and other SUHSD leaders. I appreciate, and agree, with the questions you are asking here. As an individual board member, I do not remember the board of trustees approving the detracking effort. I also agree that our community has not been involved in the conversation. I do not believe this topic was ever fully discussed at a public board meeting. When I asked Chris Thomsen about this at one of our board retreats, he said the actions were taken in many small steps over the last 10 years. The steps must have been so small, that I missed understanding what we were doing as a governance team. Thank you for your effort to push the conversation with our community.”

@local resident,

Thank you for clarifying. The process should be open, transparent, and clear. The function of the Board is to make sure that parents/community/taxpayers understand what is happening and have a mechanism for involvement/voice. The community cannot have confidence in decision that seems to have almost been made in such small steps as to obscure the intent. To that end, the Board should be petitioned to reinstate the classes and then go through a clear, transparent process to evaluate next steps.