Language arts new curriculumn for K-6th

[Anonymous]

Dear teachers - Would you please share some info and insights about the new LA curriculum? How does this compare to the current way of teaching? I applied my children to private schools for the fall because of their weak reading and writing. I'm very interested in understanding the new requirements.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

It isn't hard to improve on what was available before

[Anonymous]

The bar for improvement from the county plans is low. I can’t imagine it being worse than what we have

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

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.

I respect this but I have to disagree. I teach at a title one with several teachers that left midyear, and classes that have ran through multiple long term subs. The basal means that the new teachers can pick up wherever the last one left off and there won’t be as many gaps. It also means transient students that bounce around the county will get the same reading instruction.

[Anonymous]

Is this for all grades? Or for ES? For all K-6? Or only for lower elementary?

[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.

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.

I respect this but I have to disagree. I teach at a title one with several teachers that left midyear, and classes that have ran through multiple long term subs. The basal means that the new teachers can pick up wherever the last one left off and there won’t be as many gaps. It also means transient students that bounce around the county will get the same reading instruction.

Oh goodie, let’s cater solely to transient kids.

[Anonymous]

France opérâtes this way (students are the same things nationwide on the same schedule) and it works quite well there.

[Anonymous]

sorry for the autocorrect typos

[Anonymous]

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.

Not anymore. The current crop of inexperienced or burned out teachers don’t make good use of autonomy. Those days are over.

[Anonymous]

What curriculum is it?