Rigor is a five-letter word that most BPS teachers hate. I was firat introduced t the word about ten years ago while teaching at Madison Park Technocal Vocational High School. The admins there wanted teachers to infuse more rigor into our lessons. However, we weren't sure what rigor looked like in our content areas. Our evaluation began to depend on our rigorpus our leassons were. Today, rigor has been replaced by engagement. How engaged are the students in the lesson? Also, student voice has become a big part of the learning process. While I'm all for student engagement and voice, admns still send confusing signals as to what they're looking for in a lesson from teachers.

As for the exam school discussion, I think some people are afraid that admitting more students from marginalized communities with affect the rankings of the exam schools. The exam schools, [articularly BLS, have a reputation to uphold. If the exam schools start to flounder in theirMCAS scores that wil have a domni effect on the schools. Teachers will be nblamed. Admins will be blamed. But most of all, students, particularlly marginalized students, will be blamed.

I feel that all schols should do a top down examination of what rigor is, what it looks like, and how to teach to the standards. Teachers need quality PD to help them craft rigorous lessons. They need PD to help them understand the standards and whhich activities and lessons apply to thos standards. All students deserve an enriiching and engaging education. Students want to learn. Teachers want to present the world to them. Curriculum matters. Instruction matters. Someone needs to match curriculum to the rigor.