Challenging curriculum or poor preparation?

Published on January 18, 2008

Next year Amherst Regional High School science teachers will introduce a new ninth-grade interdisciplinary, inquiry-based science curriculum designed to increase student interest in science and develop a foundation for the study of the core scientific disciplines. Dissatisfaction with the current ninth-grade earth science course, and concern that a seventh-grade mathematics choice determines whether a ninth-grade student can take honors biology appear to be motivating this change. The new ninth-grade curriculum will now be the only option for ARHS ninth-graders.

We support the decision to eliminate courses that do not work and support not limiting a student's science options based on a decision to do extensions in seventh grade. However, we are concerned that this is a Band-Aid solution at the high school level to a far more serious problem in science and mathematics education in the elementary and middle schools. This concern comes from a number of sources including issues raised by the teachers during the presentation of the proposed curriculum at the Jan. 8 meeting of the Regional School Committee. It also comes from a comparison of the Amherst middle school curriculum with high achieving school districts. For example in Newton, a town with similar demographics, 100 percent of students take algebra compared to less than 40 percent in Amherst. Newton, therefore, begins core sciences in high school, starting with physics, without limiting the number of students prepared for the course.

At a number of points during his presentation, Mr. Nick Shaw emphasized the difficulty that even high achieving honors students at ARHS have in retaining knowledge taught in the science courses. One of the primary attractions of a required interdisciplinary course is the opportunity to introduce basic concepts prior to the core biology, chemistry and physics courses so that knowledge retention is far better when taking those courses. As teachers in quantitative disciplines, we are quite familiar with the difficulty many students have in retaining new concepts and support a curricular structure that provides repeated opportunities to learn the basics.

Yet we cannot help but wonder, as did many members of the public at the school committee meeting, whether the need for this course in ninth-grade is driven by the absence of rigorous middle school science courses. Is lack of preparedness preventing students from taking full advantage of their high school science education because the ninth-grade year is dedicated to making up for lost time? By the time students enter high school they should already have a strong background in inquiry-based science and strong science study skills.

In conversations about education in Amherst we often hear praises of the high school - particularly that students find the courses very challenging. Given what we have learned about the science program, what we understand about the math curriculum, and what we have learned about other school districts, we have a serious question: Is the high school challenging because it is as rigorous as the curriculum offered in other excellent school districts, or is it so challenging because we do not adequately prepare our students for a rigorous high school program of study?

We are heartened by Superintendent Jere Hochman's statement that the district will evaluate the middle school and take very seriously the results of the recent middle school mathematics curriculum review. Whether it is the choice of mathematics curricula, complete absence of mathematics text books in elementary school and seventh grade, or dependence on students to decide voluntarily to complete extra work in seventh grade, the low level of mathematics achievement in our district must be addressed and reversed.

From our vantage point we want to see the academic bar raised in middle school and elementary school. Let's not fix our children's education in high school, or even worse, lower the level of challenge in high school courses. Let's get it right from the start. Then we will truly be able to offer our children the high school education they need and deserve.

This column was written by four members of the Amherst Committee for Excellence: Maciej Ciesielski, professor of electrical and computer engineering, University of Massachusetts-Amherst; Steven Rivkin, professor of economics, Amherst College; Catherine Sanderson, associate professor of psychology, Amherst College; Sandip Kundu, professor of electrical and computer engineering, University of Massachusetts-Amherst.

Editor's note: Normally, the Bulletin does not run opinion pieces by candidates for elected posts during the election season, unless all candidates have been given the opportunity to submit. Catherine Sanderson announced her bid for the School Committee after she submitted this column and, as such, we will let it stand.