Why I voted against curriculum change

Recently the Iowa City Community School District Board of Directors voted on a Program of Studies that includes a change to science curriculum. The vote was 5 in favor and 1 against, with one member absent. Mine was the lone dissenting vote. My reasons for voting against the science curriculum changes are twofold: equity of opportunity concerns, and the impact that these changes will have on music and arts enrollment.

Currently 9th grade students have the option to skip Foundations of Science III (FOS3) and go directly into Biology. One of the reasons some students have chosen this option is to accelerate their coursework, preparing them to take Advanced Placement (AP) courses, which potentially provides them with college credit, improves their ACT/SAT score, and impacts their acceptance into the college of their choice and eligibility for scholarships. Due to Next Generation Science Standards curriculum requirements, as of the 2018/19 academic year, coursework covering earth and space science is required for graduation for then 9th grade students and skipping Earth and Space Science (formerly FOS3) will no longer be permitted.

Per the science proposal contained in the 2017/18 Program of Studies adopted by the board, students who wish to accelerate their science curriculum can choose to double up on required science courses in either 8th or 9th grade. Only those who scored 95 percent or above on the science portion of Iowa Assessments in 7th grade and who took Pre-Algebra or Algebra as a 7th grader will be permitted to double up on science classes in 8th grade.

In 2015, the Iowa Assessment results indicated that only 2 percent of ICCSD Black or African American, and 10 percent of Hispanic/Latino students were 'above proficient” in 7th grade science (compared to 26 percent of all the 7th grade students) (ICCSD Annual Progress Report, 2015/16). With the 95 percent rule in place, there will be racial disproportionality in 8th grade science curriculum acceleration which may contribute to disproportionality in AP course enrollment, an area where the ICCSD already struggles. According to the Office of Civil Rights, in 2013, of all the ICCSD students who took at least one AP course, only 4 percent were Black and 2 percent were Hispanic. Meanwhile, 18 percent of the district student body was Black and 9 percent was Hispanic (OCRdata.ed.gov). My equity concern is that using a 7th grader's Iowa Assessments science score to permit 8th grade acceleration in science curriculum disadvantages students (in the short and long run) who want to accelerate in science but did not score exceptionally high on this particular standardized test.

My second concern lies with the impact the science proposal will have on kids' participation in music and arts. For those that DO cross the 95 percent threshold, if they choose to accelerate their science coursework in 8th grade, they will only have one slot open for a yearlong elective, forcing them to choose between a foreign language and music/arts. I absolutely cannot support a curriculum plan that forces kids who wish to accelerate in science, to have to choose between foreign language and music/arts courses.

Best practices indicate that multiple measures should be used to identify students for extended learning programs. Similarly, I believe the district should use multiple measures to permit 8th grade enrollment in accelerated science curriculum. In addition, I would like to see identification of a way for 8th grade students to accelerate their science curriculum without having to choose between music, arts, or a foreign language. Offering an early bird course, a summer self-study option, offering an honors science track in 7th and 8th grade that includes earth and space subject matter, are just a few ideas that could be explored.

The changes to the science plan may seem minor compared to some of the issues the ICCSD is facing, however with the impact they will have on racial disproportionality in accelerated and advanced course enrollment, and arts/music involvement, I believe they deserve more attention.

' Lori Roetlin is a member of the Iowa City school board, with children in the district's elementary and secondary schools. This column represents her opinions and not necessarily those of the board. Comments: lori.roetlin@iowacityschools.org