The Debate on "High Stakes Community"

So I realize that I am talking about the debate, and it was a week and a half ago, but I feel the need to blog about it- it is still really fresh in my mind. It stated off pretty nice. Everyone was just taking it all in, but then I felt that it really started to get ugly once the "parents" presented their point of view. I (being a parent of an underachieving student) felt almost offended when the parents of the high achieving students got up there and were saying that my child was of no importance and that their children were the only ones of value to the education system because their children were more likely to go to college. What about my child's self esteem? I really had issues with the proposal when it came to the 3rd graders having to be at grade level as measured by the IBTS on reading or math or they would be required to attend summer school for 4weeks until they achieve grade level. (Which if I am a parent struggling to put food on the table, I don't think I can drive my child back and forth for 4weeks of summer school.) I feel that if a 3rd grader is not at grade level, it is not necessarily that kid's fault. There is more of a fault within the teaching system-- and why would someone punish a child for that? Everyone learns at a different rate too. We discussed this in our group prior to the debate and I said that that is where I think Multiage can have a positive effect on students. If you have students who are relatively the same age together in the classroom for instance, 4th and 5th graders, you can split them up for example in Math. If you have some 4th graders who excel in Math, put them at a higher level. If you have some 5th graders who need a little more time to understand some of the concepts you can put them at a lower level, but yet keep them with their classmates, so they don't feel as if they are out of place, since this is the time that most kids really start to worry about their peers. This way you aren't leaving someone in the dust, but also giving the students who are good in Math the opportunity to excel. You can get that happy medium. Anyways... I also did not like the "bell-shaped curve" distribution in the proposal. My child could really improve from lets say "D work" to "B+ work" but because of the bell-shaped curve they could still receive a "D". I don't think that's right. Also, when the Reps of the Fine Arts were talking, and they made a really good point of defending their program. I loved it when someone said "What makes Math and Reading so much more important than Music?" If a student loves band or choir and you just take that away because of the Standardized Testing-- it could be detrimental. That's the only part of the day that many students go to school for. If you take away what they have passion for, they may not have a reason to go to school. Obviously I think that the proposal has many flaws that need to be addressed therefore I do not support it.