Amplify/CKLA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

CKLA presents things in a way suitable for the age/grade. There is *no* topic where lower elementary should be expected to engage in "critical thinking", because that only is appropriate in later grades. In LE, the kids need to learn basic facts -- and so that is what CKLA covers.

Separately, most topics covered in K or LE can and should be covered again at a later grade before HS, again during HS, and then in college (if applicable for the student's degree). Plenty of opportunity for the critical thinking after LE grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

CKLA presents things in a way suitable for the age/grade. There is *no* topic where lower elementary should be expected to engage in "critical thinking", because that only is appropriate in later grades. In LE, the kids need to learn basic facts -- and so that is what CKLA covers.

Separately, most topics covered in K or LE can and should be covered again at a later grade before HS, again during HS, and then in college (if applicable for the student's degree). Plenty of opportunity for the critical thinking after LE grades.

This is why America is falling so far behind. As soon as you are able to think, you need to be taught critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The take home 2nd grade handout wants the parent to discuss early Asian civilizations and Buddhism and Hinduism. ?? Sure, after I spend 45 minutes reviewing the spelling list and doing a 2 sided Eureka math worksheet every night.

" So what are you guys learning about in school honey?"

"Can you tell me more about that?"

Not that hard

The answer is I don't know

Then ask more questions.

“ You remember absolutely NOTHING about what went on at school today?”

“What did you all read about today?”

“What was something you learned today that you didn’t know?”

“I hear you all are learning about early civilizations. Tell me what yàll discussed so far?”

"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5Df191WJ3o

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

While CKLA is built around the idea of building content knowledge, that doesn’t mean that the content knowledge available in its ELA accounts for all the Science, History, Geography content that grades should be expected to have covered. Hence why these teams should come together to collaborate. These ways things being covered in ELA don’t have to be repeated, and some things from ELA can be covered in the other subjects. Thus giving subjects reasonable amounts of time.

It’s not hard to cover writing or graphic organizers or even data gathering in other subjects. It also makes the content more applicable.

They should not skip the CKLA content. It is a good curriculum, much better than what MCPS does for science and social studies. They should modify science and social studies as needed to account for CKLA content already covered.

What's wrong with the NGSS standards? We use the NGSS lessons to teach science.

I thought NGSS were standards, not a curriculum. Is there a link to the curriculum?

MCPS teachers have access to legitimate, detailed NGSS lessons that align with the grade level standards. Most of us supplement and create other resources and use other materials to make it appropriate and accessible to all learners.

If teachers are required to create their own lessons and supplement, it does not sound like a very good curriculum.

NGSS is not a curriculum, really it is not. It is a set of standards.

Then we are back to not having a curriculum for teachers to implement, making following CKLA that much more important. Though teachers should be doing both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The take home 2nd grade handout wants the parent to discuss early Asian civilizations and Buddhism and Hinduism. ?? Sure, after I spend 45 minutes reviewing the spelling list and doing a 2 sided Eureka math worksheet every night.

" So what are you guys learning about in school honey?"

"Can you tell me more about that?"

Not that hard

The answer is I don't know

Then ask more questions.

“ You remember absolutely NOTHING about what went on at school today?”

“What did you all read about today?”

“What was something you learned today that you didn’t know?”

“I hear you all are learning about early civilizations. Tell me what yàll discussed so far?”

"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5Df191WJ3o

Clearly some of ya'll are use to conversation with your kids. Or kid generally as they are the conductors of the Spanish Inquisition. "Why?, Why? Can I? etc. etc..

Asking them a few questions to engage in what they are learning and what's going on in their day will not harm anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is cursive part of CLKA?

Not sure but if you want to teach your kid, I highly recommend the Cursive Logic program.

I prefer to spend that time teaching them how to type correctly, but I guess you could go in the other direction and maybe take calligraphy lessons.

This is probably sarcasm, but I would definitely prefer cursive/calligraphy over typing!

Seriously why. How many hours of the day are you spending typing and how many hours a day are you writing in cursive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The take home 2nd grade handout wants the parent to discuss early Asian civilizations and Buddhism and Hinduism. ?? Sure, after I spend 45 minutes reviewing the spelling list and doing a 2 sided Eureka math worksheet every night.

" So what are you guys learning about in school honey?"

"Can you tell me more about that?"

Not that hard

The answer is I don't know

Then ask more questions.

“ You remember absolutely NOTHING about what went on at school today?”

“What did you all read about today?”

“What was something you learned today that you didn’t know?”

“I hear you all are learning about early civilizations. Tell me what yàll discussed so far?”

And in case you guys are wondering, the entire curriculum is on the website so you can very easily see what the kids are doing each day

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

Shouldn't kids learn about science through experiments vs just reading an article about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Sorry but as an ES teacher, I cannot spend another 40 minutes a day teaching. Not enough money in the world (and definitely not in the budget).

?What

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

Facts equal content knowledge. This is what kids need to learn at young ages. Elementary students do not have the capacity to think critically about anything yet. Science and history (I refuse to call it social studies) at this age is about exposure, building excitement and laying down facts that later can be used to "think critically." That is age appropriate.

Read the Kindergarten Social Studies objectives... totally vacuous. Part of an educational theory that says kids can only understand things in their own world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

CKLA presents things in a way suitable for the age/grade. There is *no* topic where lower elementary should be expected to engage in "critical thinking", because that only is appropriate in later grades. In LE, the kids need to learn basic facts -- and so that is what CKLA covers.

Separately, most topics covered in K or LE can and should be covered again at a later grade before HS, again during HS, and then in college (if applicable for the student's degree). Plenty of opportunity for the critical thinking after LE grades.

This is why America is falling so far behind. As soon as you are able to think, you need to be taught critical thinking.

No, it is a lack of factual knowledge that leads to declining American education. "Critical thinking" is a buzzword without substance. People who totally lack historical context, basic scientific fundamentals, etc. offering their opinions on everything. Critical thinking means that you have factual knowledge, good communication skills (both written and verbal) and have been expected to practice argumentation skills (both written and verbal). You CANNOT think about anything critically without the underlying knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

Shouldn't kids learn about science through experiments vs just reading an article about it.

Hands-on is important, but no, kids don't relearn all scientific knowledge through their elementary activities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The "content" in CKLA is not related to the standards students are supposed to learn in elementary science and social studies at these ages. The topics in K-2 develop some background for topics that are covered in common core social studies in 4th and 5th grades (Native Americans, American colonies, Christopher Columbus-- all K topics in CKLA). At K-2 it is not developmentally appropriate to cover these topics in a way that encourages critical thinking about government systems in place or how events shaped history. Similarly in science students in 1st grade are excited to learn about space, but they are not able to grasp the size and distances of the planets or really understand the science involved in astronomy- they learn isolated facts.

CKLA presents things in a way suitable for the age/grade. There is *no* topic where lower elementary should be expected to engage in "critical thinking", because that only is appropriate in later grades. In LE, the kids need to learn basic facts -- and so that is what CKLA covers.

Separately, most topics covered in K or LE can and should be covered again at a later grade before HS, again during HS, and then in college (if applicable for the student's degree). Plenty of opportunity for the critical thinking after LE grades.

This is why America is falling so far behind. As soon as you are able to think, you need to be taught critical thinking.

No, it is a lack of factual knowledge that leads to declining American education. "Critical thinking" is a buzzword without substance. People who totally lack historical context, basic scientific fundamentals, etc. offering their opinions on everything. Critical thinking means that you have factual knowledge, good communication skills (both written and verbal) and have been expected to practice argumentation skills (both written and verbal). You CANNOT think about anything critically without the underlying knowledge.

This.

Critical thinking can make sense starting in upper elementary, and accelerating in MS/HS, but the kids need a set of facts in their heads from lower elementary as the foundation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Core Knowledge is built around the idea of building content knowledge in all areas. Science, History and Geography are included.

Shouldn't kids learn about science through experiments vs just reading an article about it.

At lower elementary, learning primarily should be through direct instruction. Some hands on is fine as a supplement at that level.

Learning science primarily through experiments is usually graduate study.

Signed, PhD in an experimental science (to be clear: not a social science).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The spelling program in grades 3-5 isn't good at all because it's under the impression that every student is on grade-level. RGR would still be a good supplement in grades 3-5 for struggling readers.

RGR is still available as an intervention.

We were basically told as a staff that only a very small handful of students would be getting intervention because there isn't enough time in the schedule because ckla is so time consuming. It takes 2 hours a day to complete the entire curriculum if you're doing it correctly. My daughter's 4th grade ELA teacher admitted that the kids are getting 15 minutes of social studies because she doesn't have time to do anything else.

As a school leader, this is what drives me nuts about MCPS. Each curriculum office chooses a number of minutes per day/week that a subject must be taught. It's presented each year at a meeting in the spring when we begin developing schedules for the next year. All of the building leaders in the room add up the recommended times for each subject area and repeatedly tell central office that there literally aren't enough minutes in our current school day to teach the subjects with the times given. No curriculum office wants to back down from their recommendations as each feels their subject is the most important. Inevitably, we go back to our own schools and prioritize reading and math while doing our best to fit in SS and science. We also have FIT time at our school so students get targeted, small group instruction that isn't offered within the CKLA or Eureka blocks. If we didn't provide targeted small group instruction, our data would be worse. It's a lose-lose with all these competing demands. In all honesty, lunch/recess needs to go back to sixty minutes and we should extend the day by about thirty minutes.

+1 Plus at the ES level, these teams should sit down to see where cross curricular learning to take place. SS and Science include ELA and Math.

Sorry but as an ES teacher, I cannot spend another 40 minutes a day teaching. Not enough money in the world (and definitely not in the budget).

?What

In response to the school leader saying that ES needs to cut 10 minutes from recess and extend the day by 30 minutes to have enough time to teach everything.