OK, NOW BEAR WITH ME HERE. This morning’s LA Times has a story about Tustin Unified School District. According to the story, the ACLU has charged that “Too few Latino and African American students are enrolled in gifted programs” at the TUSD. They’re threatening a lawsuit:"The district is not doing enough to identify talented students from different racial and ethnic groups and different income levels," said Hector Villagra, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Orange County office. "We've looked at other districts in Orange County, and a number of them are also doing a poor job, but Tustin is really off the charts." (ACLU targets Tustin Unified's gifted program)
It seems to me that Villagra's point concerns the "mission" of a public school district. What are we to make of a district that emphasizes assisting the especially prepared while neglecting the especially unprepared or disadvantaged? And is TUSD doing that?
MEANWHILE...
Back in January, the OC Register got excited about IVC’s expanded partnership with Tustin Unified, as we then reported ("Offhand" question). According to the Reg,
Tustin high school students will be able to graduate with a high school diploma and a college associate's degree at the same time after the district and Irvine Valley College agreed Monday on a program that will start in the fall.
The program will put college professors in high school classrooms to teach college courses, giving students a chance to earn college credit throughout high school without paying college tuition.
…The early college program will launch in the fall at Beckman High School, and will be brought to Tustin High and Foothill High schools soon after. (See.)
The Reg goes on to explain that “The district is targeting students in high school honors and college preparation courses.”
Uh-oh. There's that pattern again.
FACULTY OUT OF THE LOOP
I week or so earlier, during an IVC Academic Senate (faculty) meeting, senators expressed surprise and consternation when they learned about the Tustin/IVC program. Few were aware of it, and yet, evidently, it was already a “done deal.” Senators generally felt that they’d not been kept in the loop. (They often feel that way, these days. Consider how ATEP has developed--until now without significant faculty input, despite the faculty's authority over program & curriculum development, etc.)
But other issues arose during that meeting. I recall senators expressing reservations about participating in a program that singles out the “best and the brightest” among students. Targeting those students isn’t the community college system’s mission, they said. (For a statement of the California community college system's mission, see Mission.)
Since then, administrators have been making the rounds explaining and defending the program to faculty. In the course of that effort, faculty learned that early college programs are increasingly popular. It appears that we’re faced with another one of those “this may suck, but it’s inevitable, and so we’d better get on board” situations.
On the other hand, the Tustin/IVC program is unusual. For one thing, its courses will be held at the High Schools, not at the college.
Well, that’s no biggie, I suppose.
But then there’s this: early college programs typically target "underrepresented" students. That makes them especially attractive. (It also makes them eligible for huge chunks of "Bill & Melinda" cash.)
But, as I say, the Tustin/IVC program is not that kind. It's special. It focuses on "honors" and "college prep" students--students who are already assisted by the school district in other ways.
And now there’s this ACLU business.
See also the Reg's ACLU critical of gifted program.
(Note: by law, all CA community college courses are essentially open to all. This means that non-TUSD students--e.g., my Aunt Fanny--can enroll in the Tustin/IVC courses. In reality, however, most students will be from the High School.)
