Language arts new curriculumn for K-6th

[Anonymous]

I teach kindergarten and I’m hopeful for this. I’ve been envious of our local catholic school and their program. The current county written word study for us is all over the place and is missing pieces and can be frustrating to follow.

I hope this also includes writing. That really needs an overhaul too.

[Anonymous]

Does this include middle schools and high school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

I retired last year after 30 years with FCPS. Somehow I never learned much about Lucy Calkins. I remember a few years before I retired (perhaps around 2019 or so) hearing a reading specialist refer to "Lucy" during a CT meeting. I kept thinking, "Who is this Lucy she keeps referencing?". Then perhaps two years ago they started talking about how "Lucy" was on it's way out.

So funny, me too. I would see a few other teachers use the materials, but several members on my team didn’t use it and we were never asked about it.

But that’s how they built their scripted slide decks that they passed to the teachers! So, you all were using it.

Actually, no. Contrary to what DCUM thinks/says we all aren’t using those slide decks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does this include middle schools and high school?

No, K-6.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

+1 with 6th grader. What is the plan to catch these kids up with grammar and spelling? Hopefully, outside help has brought people to read ok. But, grammar and spelling needs brought up. There seems to be several years of students who missed a lot because of no appropriate curriculum, just following the guess the word by looking at the picture method and told to write one Lucy Calkin’s ‘fun’ essay after another with no real writing training.

My 6th grader has had spelling assessments all year as well as grammar.

Because your 6th grader has a good teacher.

The difference in language arts teachers between my kids given the different teachers they have had has been shocking. My 4th grader is constantly teasing my 6th grader with the new words and word stems she's learned from her teacher's intensive use of Caesar's English that my 6th grader doesn't know - and they were both in 4th grade AAP at the same school, they just had different teachers. I imagine spelling and grammar would be the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

+1 with 6th grader. What is the plan to catch these kids up with grammar and spelling? Hopefully, outside help has brought people to read ok. But, grammar and spelling needs brought up. There seems to be several years of students who missed a lot because of no appropriate curriculum, just following the guess the word by looking at the picture method and told to write one Lucy Calkin’s ‘fun’ essay after another with no real writing training.

My 6th grader has had spelling assessments all year as well as grammar.

Because your 6th grader has a good teacher.

The difference in language arts teachers between my kids given the different teachers they have had has been shocking. My 4th grader is constantly teasing my 6th grader with the new words and word stems she's learned from her teacher's intensive use of Caesar's English that my 6th grader doesn't know - and they were both in 4th grade AAP at the same school, they just had different teachers. I imagine spelling and grammar would be the same.

DP. I have a 5th grader and 7th grader who are at/went to the same center school and their experiences have been very different. The grades are taught as a team, so the differences between classes and teachers is pretty small. I think the pandemic and changes in curriculum (also a new principal who seems to be less academically-minded than the previous one) account for the differences, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

Do the kids actually read any novels in the upper grades with this new curriculum, or is it all short passages to train them or the SOL? I’m not holding my breath.

What are you taking about? My kids have had book clubs starting in 3rd grade. They have read novels 3-6th. Then in MS and HS MANY are required.

And this is why curriculum needs to be standardized across all of FCPS because your children get book clubs and mine don't get anything.

Our kids experienced book clubs in 3-6th grade, but they weren’t great because they weren’t run well. The students were expected to read x pages and just talk about it. But, at those young ages, no one knew how to be a leader nor did anyone know literature terms and devices to add any value. It was very poorly executed.

The ones that were pretty fun were the ones where you had to read several pages and then answer either one or several out of a larger set of questions and then also respond to other's responses. I thought that was cleverly done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

I retired last year after 30 years with FCPS. Somehow I never learned much about Lucy Calkins. I remember a few years before I retired (perhaps around 2019 or so) hearing a reading specialist refer to "Lucy" during a CT meeting. I kept thinking, "Who is this Lucy she keeps referencing?". Then perhaps two years ago they started talking about how "Lucy" was on it's way out.

So funny, me too. I would see a few other teachers use the materials, but several members on my team didn’t use it and we were never asked about it.

But that’s how they built their scripted slide decks that they passed to the teachers! So, you all were using it.

Actually, no. Contrary to what DCUM thinks/says we all aren’t using those slide decks.

True. Fair. But they have been used at our elementary schools over last 7 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

Do the kids actually read any novels in the upper grades with this new curriculum, or is it all short passages to train them or the SOL? I’m not holding my breath.

What are you taking about? My kids have had book clubs starting in 3rd grade. They have read novels 3-6th. Then in MS and HS MANY are required.

And this is why curriculum needs to be standardized across all of FCPS because your children get book clubs and mine don't get anything.

Our kids experienced book clubs in 3-6th grade, but they weren’t great because they weren’t run well. The students were expected to read x pages and just talk about it. But, at those young ages, no one knew how to be a leader nor did anyone know literature terms and devices to add any value. It was very poorly executed.

The ones that were pretty fun were the ones where you had to read several pages and then answer either one or several out of a larger set of questions and then also respond to other's responses. I thought that was cleverly done.

Yes! I agree with this. But, then DC would arrive at book club with their written work and only 2 out of 4 did it. So there’s no collaboration possible among the 4. In fact, one didn’t even read it. The teacher didn’t check. The teacher doesn’t float around and produce discussion. The kids sit around and shoot the breeze. Poorly executed. But the questions were well- written if the young elementary kids would have had a teacher lead them through discussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

+1 with 6th grader. What is the plan to catch these kids up with grammar and spelling? Hopefully, outside help has brought people to read ok. But, grammar and spelling needs brought up. There seems to be several years of students who missed a lot because of no appropriate curriculum, just following the guess the word by looking at the picture method and told to write one Lucy Calkin’s ‘fun’ essay after another with no real writing training.

My 6th grader has had spelling assessments all year as well as grammar.

Because your 6th grader has a good teacher.

The difference in language arts teachers between my kids given the different teachers they have had has been shocking. My 4th grader is constantly teasing my 6th grader with the new words and word stems she's learned from her teacher's intensive use of Caesar's English that my 6th grader doesn't know - and they were both in 4th grade AAP at the same school, they just had different teachers. I imagine spelling and grammar would be the same.

Your fourth grader kind of sounds like a jerk. I’m an AAP teacher and we were told to stop using Caesar’s English in 2019. So your fourth grader’s teacher may still be using it against guidance, but don’t hold that against your sixth grader’s teacher who was doing what they were told to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

Do the kids actually read any novels in the upper grades with this new curriculum, or is it all short passages to train them or the SOL? I’m not holding my breath.

What are you taking about? My kids have had book clubs starting in 3rd grade. They have read novels 3-6th. Then in MS and HS MANY are required.

And this is why curriculum needs to be standardized across all of FCPS because your children get book clubs and mine don't get anything.

Our kids experienced book clubs in 3-6th grade, but they weren’t great because they weren’t run well. The students were expected to read x pages and just talk about it. But, at those young ages, no one knew how to be a leader nor did anyone know literature terms and devices to add any value. It was very poorly executed.

The ones that were pretty fun were the ones where you had to read several pages and then answer either one or several out of a larger set of questions and then also respond to other's responses. I thought that was cleverly done.

Yes! I agree with this. But, then DC would arrive at book club with their written work and only 2 out of 4 did it. So there’s no collaboration possible among the 4. In fact, one didn’t even read it. The teacher didn’t check. The teacher doesn’t float around and produce discussion. The kids sit around and shoot the breeze. Poorly executed. But the questions were well- written if the young elementary kids would have had a teacher lead them through discussions.

Is this because the teacher is meeting with small groups? When I was teaching we were required to spend a lot of our day meeting with small groups for reading, math, and during a separate intervention/enrichment block. I was also trying to plan for and monitor the time for the students who weren't meeting with me in small group. It was overwhelming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

+1 with 6th grader. What is the plan to catch these kids up with grammar and spelling? Hopefully, outside help has brought people to read ok. But, grammar and spelling needs brought up. There seems to be several years of students who missed a lot because of no appropriate curriculum, just following the guess the word by looking at the picture method and told to write one Lucy Calkin’s ‘fun’ essay after another with no real writing training.

My 6th grader has had spelling assessments all year as well as grammar.

Because your 6th grader has a good teacher.

The difference in language arts teachers between my kids given the different teachers they have had has been shocking. My 4th grader is constantly teasing my 6th grader with the new words and word stems she's learned from her teacher's intensive use of Caesar's English that my 6th grader doesn't know - and they were both in 4th grade AAP at the same school, they just had different teachers. I imagine spelling and grammar would be the same.

Your fourth grader kind of sounds like a jerk. I’m an AAP teacher and we were told to stop using Caesar’s English in 2019. So your fourth grader’s teacher may still be using it against guidance, but don’t hold that against your sixth grader’s teacher who was doing what they were told to do.

Why? It’s an excellent program. And for the record, my child used it in 2021-2022.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

Do the kids actually read any novels in the upper grades with this new curriculum, or is it all short passages to train them or the SOL? I’m not holding my breath.

What are you taking about? My kids have had book clubs starting in 3rd grade. They have read novels 3-6th. Then in MS and HS MANY are required.

And this is why curriculum needs to be standardized across all of FCPS because your children get book clubs and mine don't get anything.

Our kids experienced book clubs in 3-6th grade, but they weren’t great because they weren’t run well. The students were expected to read x pages and just talk about it. But, at those young ages, no one knew how to be a leader nor did anyone know literature terms and devices to add any value. It was very poorly executed.

The ones that were pretty fun were the ones where you had to read several pages and then answer either one or several out of a larger set of questions and then also respond to other's responses. I thought that was cleverly done.

Yes! I agree with this. But, then DC would arrive at book club with their written work and only 2 out of 4 did it. So there’s no collaboration possible among the 4. In fact, one didn’t even read it. The teacher didn’t check. The teacher doesn’t float around and produce discussion. The kids sit around and shoot the breeze. Poorly executed. But the questions were well- written if the young elementary kids would have had a teacher lead them through discussions.

Is this because the teacher is meeting with small groups? When I was teaching we were required to spend a lot of our day meeting with small groups for reading, math, and during a separate intervention/enrichment block. I was also trying to plan for and monitor the time for the students who weren't meeting with me in small group. It was overwhelming.

DP, we are often told to run 2-3 activities simultaneously. Book clubs meet while we do small groups, etc.

And for the PP, the teacher is WELL aware of which students are not reading the book, so don’t worry about that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

T

That sounds kind of awful for teachers. But I will admit that my older DC was taught to read with "Good readers look at the pictures" three-cueing, while my younger DC has gotten a decent amount of phonics. And neither of them have a strong grasp of grammar and sentence structure, or have any grasp at all of formal writing. Lucy Calkins has a lot to answer for.

Unless there is an older teacher sneaking those methods in three cueing is unheard of now. Most new teachers wouldn’t even be able to tell you what that is because colleges don’t teach it anymore.

It was only 3 years ago. I know that FCPS has really changed their reading curriculum, for the better. If they change their writing curriculum, I'll be happy. I 'm not sure an entirely scripted all-inclusive reading and writing program is needed - I guess we'll see how it is. What our teachers need more of is autonomy, not more scripts.

100% agree with you. My current 5th grader was taught with the Lucy Calkins method and it took two years of tutoring to get her up to the appropriate reading level (one of those years was online due to Covid), but her writing is still atrocious and she doesn't know any grammar and she can't spell.

+1 with 6th grader. What is the plan to catch these kids up with grammar and spelling? Hopefully, outside help has brought people to read ok. But, grammar and spelling needs brought up. There seems to be several years of students who missed a lot because of no appropriate curriculum, just following the guess the word by looking at the picture method and told to write one Lucy Calkin’s ‘fun’ essay after another with no real writing training.

My 6th grader has had spelling assessments all year as well as grammar.

Because your 6th grader has a good teacher.

The difference in language arts teachers between my kids given the different teachers they have had has been shocking. My 4th grader is constantly teasing my 6th grader with the new words and word stems she's learned from her teacher's intensive use of Caesar's English that my 6th grader doesn't know - and they were both in 4th grade AAP at the same school, they just had different teachers. I imagine spelling and grammar would be the same.

Your fourth grader kind of sounds like a jerk. I’m an AAP teacher and we were told to stop using Caesar’s English in 2019. So your fourth grader’s teacher may still be using it against guidance, but don’t hold that against your sixth grader’s teacher who was doing what they were told to do.

Why? It’s an excellent program. And for the record, my child used it in 2021-2022.

PP here, It was good and I rather enjoyed it. FCPS never tells us why they replace things, maybe it was money or licensing, who knows. I do recall there being an issue with not having enough workbooks and teachers having to photocopy all the pages. Ultimately, it was replaced with other activities in the AAP pacing guide.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am all for it. While there are a lot of negatives such of lack of choice and teacher autonomy there are many pluses. The main one is that it will equalize the quality of teaching across the county. Your student will get the same reading instruction if they are being taught by a 30 year veteran teacher in a rich area or are be being taught by a teacher trainee or long term sub in a title one, the book literally tells you what to say. Right now there is reading “curriculum” but it is strongly suggested and many schools don’t even use the phonics lessons and use something else and the writing plans are minimal . The new curriculum is all inclusive and had reading comprehension , writing, grammar, and small group instruction.

Do the kids actually read any novels in the upper grades with this new curriculum, or is it all short passages to train them or the SOL? I’m not holding my breath.

What are you taking about? My kids have had book clubs starting in 3rd grade. They have read novels 3-6th. Then in MS and HS MANY are required.

And this is why curriculum needs to be standardized across all of FCPS because your children get book clubs and mine don't get anything.

Our kids experienced book clubs in 3-6th grade, but they weren’t great because they weren’t run well. The students were expected to read x pages and just talk about it. But, at those young ages, no one knew how to be a leader nor did anyone know literature terms and devices to add any value. It was very poorly executed.

The ones that were pretty fun were the ones where you had to read several pages and then answer either one or several out of a larger set of questions and then also respond to other's responses. I thought that was cleverly done.

Yes! I agree with this. But, then DC would arrive at book club with their written work and only 2 out of 4 did it. So there’s no collaboration possible among the 4. In fact, one didn’t even read it. The teacher didn’t check. The teacher doesn’t float around and produce discussion. The kids sit around and shoot the breeze. Poorly executed. But the questions were well- written if the young elementary kids would have had a teacher lead them through discussions.

Is this because the teacher is meeting with small groups? When I was teaching we were required to spend a lot of our day meeting with small groups for reading, math, and during a separate intervention/enrichment block. I was also trying to plan for and monitor the time for the students who weren't meeting with me in small group. It was overwhelming.

DP, we are often told to run 2-3 activities simultaneously. Book clubs meet while we do small groups, etc.

And for the PP, the teacher is WELL aware of which students are not reading the book, so don’t worry about that.

PP here.
Yes. That is exactly what I was referencing.