Disappointed about CES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.

Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.

Have you ever tried to learn another language through immersion? It's incredibly hard and it's not fair to claim that all English language learning students are needy and inept.

Yes. For a child, it takes 3-6 months if you have a good understanding of grammar and vocabulary in your first language. Then it’s almost mathematical. But not speaking or practicing it at home or weekends may hinder the learning.
If you are very young and starting out you can do language 2 at school and language 1 at home. Like Washington Int’l school does.
Immersion public schools do a mix of both languages PK-4 — like baileys ES in Fairfax, Oyster in dC, or the various offerings in MCPS up county and down county:

[Anonymous]

Basically for an eS kid, staying in ESOL for longer than 12-18 months is indicative of other problems, whether they be at home, work ethic, or general ability to learn.
Now, maybe MCPS wants more aid, fed funds, more esol teachers per classroom, so juices up esol numbers even though some should have graduated. I don’t know

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work

We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??

Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).

For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.

It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.

Agree. CES in our school pyramids pulls from a very dense are of highly educated white collar families and over 10 ES, many with 5-6 classrooms per grade. Our smaller ES went from having 20 admits to 2. So we are not served. Our kids have a disjointed curriculum, no homework, little differentiation in school, and no specials to keep them interested or learning other things (since reading books all day for school is not where it’s at).

Furthermore, private school applications were up 20% at the DC and MoCo private schools; the increase was mainly from MoCo-based admits. Go take a tour of any of them and ask for yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.

Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.

Truth

This is borderline incomprehensible.

Agree.

I don't

It draws the parallels between some parents who believe that clustering kids in classrooms often by SES and calling them gifted isn't that different from parents attempting to cluster kids in schools often by SES and calling them privileged. It is all about concentrating resources and targeting them towards those who need them the least at the expense of kids with less.

-You don't think kids at the bottom of the education gap wouldn't benefit from having more CES kids in their class?
-How is that different than poor kids benefiting from having rich kids integrated into their poor school? Some might say it is the exact same conversation.

I see the point

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work

We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??

Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).

For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.

It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.

I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.

Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.

Truth

This is borderline incomprehensible.

Agree.

I don't

It draws the parallels between some parents who believe that clustering kids in classrooms often by SES and calling them gifted isn't that different from parents attempting to cluster kids in schools often by SES and calling them privileged. It is all about concentrating resources and targeting them towards those who need them the least at the expense of kids with less.

-You don't think kids at the bottom of the education gap wouldn't benefit from having more CES kids in their class?
-How is that different than poor kids benefiting from having rich kids integrated into their poor school? Some might say it is the exact same conversation.

I see the point

Curriculum 2.0 (2011-2019) got rid of differentiation and acceleration in k-12, forcing the one teacher of 22-28 ES kids, to provide it herself. She was lucky if Titile 1 or esol school since then she’d have a teachers aide with her or a smaller class size.
Grades 6-8 this was/is even more pronounced: Huge middle schools, Different races in each of your classes of 30-33 students, Zero differentiation in ability. Basically one third of the class was engaged, and that is if they wanted to speak up in front of the 2/3s class that sat around in their phone or chrome book.

The Zero ability differentiation experiment MCPS did with our children failed. Big time. They are slowly playing catch up, but to date it has been wholly inadequate.

The only curricula working in MCPS is the magnet programs and the high schools. After that, MCPS is failing esol kids, farm kids, poorly performing kids, average performing kids, neglected top students.

[Anonymous]

Different faces! My kid never had the same kids in any of her 7 classes. And lunch was a disaster of no room, eating in hallways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work

We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??

Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).

For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.

It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.

I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.

If you want to provide facts or something comprehensive, put up a density map with stars of where the CES are located, number of ES schools each pulls from, number of total 3rd graders each CES has purview over.

Do the same for Ms and Hs magnets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work

We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??

Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).

For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.

It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.

I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.

If you want to provide facts or something comprehensive, put up a density map with stars of where the CES are located, number of ES schools each pulls from, number of total 3rd graders each CES has purview over.

Do the same for Ms and Hs magnets.

Actually, please do it yourself, rather than just bellyaching. The information is there; you are just being lazy. I'm not here to indulge in your fantasy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.

Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.

Truth

This is borderline incomprehensible.

Agree.

I don't

It draws the parallels between some parents who believe that clustering kids in classrooms often by SES and calling them gifted isn't that different from parents attempting to cluster kids in schools often by SES and calling them privileged. It is all about concentrating resources and targeting them towards those who need them the least at the expense of kids with less.

-You don't think kids at the bottom of the education gap wouldn't benefit from having more CES kids in their class?
-How is that different than poor kids benefiting from having rich kids integrated into their poor school? Some might say it is the exact same conversation.

I see the point

Actually the resources in MCPS are targeted at those low SES schools. Class sizes can be 16 or 18 in focus schools while in wealthier areas it can be as high as 26-27. They also provide free after school programs and they are spending money on an extended school year program at a few schools in those areas. Kids in wealthier parts of the county do not have any of this stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If MoCo is only admitting 99%-tile kids, then it is unlikely that that population has exploded to the same extent. I agree the program should be expanded. It should also be made made continuous ie once you are in you should only leave if you fail out and there should be entry years where you can test on along the way. For the über gifted there can be special programs but smart hardworking kids shouldn’t have to compete for advanced work

We’ll never know, they stopped reporting cogat scores of admits last year when they remade the selection criteria. Who knows what the bar is now—90%, 95%, 99%??

Either way for a “top school district” with a large portion of the most educated parents in the country, mcps only having G&T seats for less than 1% of its student body is pretty pathetic. And telling of the Admins priorities and share of mind (ie. It ain’t on high performers).

For CES programs, it's more than 1%. Probably north of 5%. There are 9 regional CES programs, and if each has only 2 CES classes per grade (ours has 3) with 28 kids each, that's 504 seats. Assuming the 162K students in the system are evenly distributed across K-12, that's about 12,500 per grade. The regional CES programs cover 4% of kids in each grade, more if you count the local centers.

It’s still pretty exclusive ( I mean that as excluding qualified candidates not some highly vaunted thing). Given the demographics of the county, this means a lot of kids who would benefit are being short changed.

I don't disagree, but I posted that because these debates tend to be fact-free zones, and that isn't helping.

If you want to provide facts or something comprehensive, put up a density map with stars of where the CES are located, number of ES schools each pulls from, number of total 3rd graders each CES has purview over.

Do the same for Ms and Hs magnets.

Actually, please do it yourself, rather than just bellyaching. The information is there; you are just being lazy. I'm not here to indulge in your fantasy.

The actual facts and answer doesn’t fit your false narrative so no one here expects you to do it anyhow.

[Anonymous]

Read this https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

Then continue your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read this https://montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/sharedaccountability/reports/2019/Enriched%20and%20Accelerated%2028Jan2019%20FINAL.pdf

Then continue your argument.

I have read it. Doesn't change a thing. The CES program isn't serving "less than 1%" of the students in 4th grade (or 5th grade). That's the point I'm addressing, and it's demonstrably false.

If you want to make every point some sort of referendum on your view that MoCo is eviscerating the magnet programs by trying to make the student body more diverse, your prerogative.

Have a great day!

[Anonymous]

I have no idea what you're talking about. I am a NP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it ironic that the people pushing for more classroom segregation are often the ones talking about mixing the buildings the most. As if the ideas of mixing class rooms are toxic but mixing the buildings provides magic benefits. Or as if putting high achievers off to the side as to not be affected by the plebeians is noble in academics but immoral for SES academics.

Your desire to keep your child untethered is no different than the W’s desire, and poor kids and the education gap could be helped by just mixing kids by age and letting the rest fall where it may. But on the same token we have to be honest that the collective is help back by the weight of the needy and inept.

Truth

This is borderline incomprehensible.

Agree on the incomprehensible. What does it mean to
Keep kids “untethered?”