Is MCPS Superintendent Starr stupid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Starr has not minced words. Proof is right here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/12/24/nonsense-about-superintendent-joshua-starr/

Joshua Starr held his ground despite the opposition. In an opinion piece on the topic he stated, “Some may think we have a choice about eliminating tracking. I do not. If we want to live up to the ideals of social justice and equity long espoused by our community, we must ensure that each and every one of our children has access to a curriculum based on high standards that prepares them to graduate ready for higher education and success in the 21st century.” In Starr’s words, the reduction in tracking became “the hill that he was willing to die on.”

Cause Schools are all about the Social Justice baby!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Starr has not minced words. Proof is right here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/12/24/nonsense-about-superintendent-joshua-starr/

Joshua Starr held his ground despite the opposition. In an opinion piece on the topic he stated, “Some may think we have a choice about eliminating tracking. I do not. If we want to live up to the ideals of social justice and equity long espoused by our community, we must ensure that each and every one of our children has access to a curriculum based on high standards that prepares them to graduate ready for higher education and success in the 21st century.” In Starr’s words, the reduction in tracking became “the hill that he was willing to die on.”

Cause Schools are all about the Social Justice baby!

So what you are saying is that you know that no system is perfect, and some kids are going to get left behind, and you are good with that as long as it is not your kids.
Point Taken
Now give it a rest

[Anonymous]

It means that according to Liberal dogma, Asian Americans (like Whites but more so) need to be held back as much as possible in order to reduce the gap between high and low achieving ethnicities

Do Asian Americans subcribe to this liberal dogma? If they do not, who in fact are the ethnic group (s) espousing this dogma? Are they ethnic group (s) in leading educational policy making? Who are they?

If it's not the Asian Americans espousing this liberal dogma (and lumping Asian Americans with Whites in their statistical analysis plans); is it the Whites (e.g., Starr, the leaders and education policy makers) trying to use closure of the performance gap between "us" and the Blacks and Hispanics as the raison d'etre when in fact; it is the ever widening achievement and performance gap between Asian Americans and Whites as we are increasingly moving to the back of the educational bus in HGC, magnet programs (TJ, Blair) all over the land (diminishing proportional representation). This may explain why we now want to change and tweak the entry critieria in order to reestablish our (really self serving when you get right downto it) proportional representation of yesteryear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Starr has not minced words. Proof is right here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/12/24/nonsense-about-superintendent-joshua-starr/

Joshua Starr held his ground despite the opposition. In an opinion piece on the topic he stated, “Some may think we have a choice about eliminating tracking. I do not. If we want to live up to the ideals of social justice and equity long espoused by our community, we must ensure that each and every one of our children has access to a curriculum based on high standards that prepares them to graduate ready for higher education and success in the 21st century.” In Starr’s words, the reduction in tracking became “the hill that he was willing to die on.”

Cause Schools are all about the Social Justice baby!

So what you are saying is that you know that no system is perfect, and some kids are going to get left behind, and you are good with that as long as it is not your kids.
Point Taken
Now give it a rest

No, I am saying some kids are behind, and some are ahead, but that overall the best results occur when everyone is taught at their level. Starr is saying that kids of different ability levels should be grouped together in the interest of "social justice". He is an indoctrinated moron.

[Anonymous]

Starr has been clear in various forums that he believes that kids of different abilities should be in the same classroom. Kids who are behind learn from the ones who are further ahead.

Reality of this is seen inside classrooms. For those who want proof, I agree with some others here. Spend a week or two in some classrooms. Hear what teachers have to say. Too many groups, too little time.

Starr's social justice dream can't fit in the hours in a school day.

Yes, all kids need to be taught. All kids need to learn. Lumping them all together and saying it's for the greater good is a cop-out. Kids don't learn to walk at the same time, they don't learn to talk at the same time. They learn at different paces. Three level groups in a classroom works. Six (as happens in many classrooms around here) means that someone's not getting something that they need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"PP, please do some basic research. Here are the demographic categories MCPS uses:

African American
American Indian
Asian American
Hispanic
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
White
Two or more races

This is not a secret. It's at the top of the at-a-glance report for every school in MCPS."


The only secret is this statistical slicing and dicing (manipulation) that comes up with only one statisticallt significant gap in all these variables. Not believable. SES is a far better variable to uses.

Which MCPS also reports, via FARMS data. Or do you think we should provide our tax returns to MCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Starr has not minced words. Proof is right here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2012/12/24/nonsense-about-superintendent-joshua-starr/

Joshua Starr held his ground despite the opposition. In an opinion piece on the topic he stated, “Some may think we have a choice about eliminating tracking. I do not. If we want to live up to the ideals of social justice and equity long espoused by our community, we must ensure that each and every one of our children has access to a curriculum based on high standards that prepares them to graduate ready for higher education and success in the 21st century.” In Starr’s words, the reduction in tracking became “the hill that he was willing to die on.”

This article refers to his time at Stamford. When, according to the article, "There were up to five tracks in the middle schools. Although only 40% of all students in the district were White, nearly 79% of the honors track was White. Conversely, although 53% of the district’s students were Black or Latino, only 11% of the honors track was Black or Latino. In the three lowest tracks, however, about 73% of the students were Black or Latino. It was as if two separate school systems existed."

So Starr eliminated a "rigid tracking system that was responsible for de-facto segregation". (Is this what we have in MCPS? Is this you want in MCPS?) And what happened? "State test scores went up for all subgroups, with accelerated growth for Black and Latino students. A survey of parents, students, and teachers showed positive reactions to the reform. The percentage of Black or Latino students in the honors math track increased from 11% to 30%—a dramatic shift in the proportion of student groups in the highest track."

If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

[Anonymous]

I do not support 1040 but FARM data is not very granular. What is the cut off here (< $30,000 [?] and everyone else)? How useful is this...those above and below the poverty line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

It is just what I, and others, have said. Stop embarrassing yourself.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Blogs/Education-Matters/January-February-2013/MCPS-Superintendent-Says-Mixed-Ability-Grouping-is-Here-to-Stay/

"MCPS Superintendent Says Mixed-Ability Grouping is Here to Stay"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Pearson came with Weast, idiot.

And to say that Common Core, which drives Curriculum 2.0, is dumbing down is ridiculous. If you worked with CC standards (I have) and if you've written curriculum using CC (I have), you'd understand that these standards are very complex and rigorous.

But maybe they're too difficult for YOU to grasp?

[Anonymous]

This article refers to his time at Stamford. When, according to the article, "There were up to five tracks in the middle schools. Although only 40% of all students in the district were White, nearly 79% of the honors track was White. Conversely, although 53% of the district’s students were Black or Latino, only 11% of the honors track was Black or Latino. In the three lowest tracks, however, about 73% of the students were Black or Latino. It was as if two separate school systems existed."

So Starr eliminated a "rigid tracking system that was responsible for de-facto segregation". (Is this what we have in MCPS? Is this you want in MCPS?) And what happened? "State test scores went up for all subgroups, with accelerated growth for Black and Latino students. A survey of parents, students, and teachers showed positive reactions to the reform. The percentage of Black or Latino students in the honors math track increased from 11% to 30%—a dramatic shift in the proportion of student groups in the highest track."

If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

We do not have de facto segregation in MCPS? de facto segregation in MCPS by zip code? I bet you can count the number of Black and Latino students in the MCPS classrooms of Mr. Starr's children on a single hand with a missing finger. So much for liberal mumbo jumbo philosophy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Pearson came with Weast, idiot.

And to say that Common Core, which drives Curriculum 2.0, is dumbing down is ridiculous. If you worked with CC standards (I have) and if you've written curriculum using CC (I have), you'd understand that these standards are very complex and rigorous.

But maybe they're too difficult for YOU to grasp?

classy rebuttal and diction. exactly who I'd want allegedly writing my child's so-called curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Pearson came with Weast, idiot.

And to say that Common Core, which drives Curriculum 2.0, is dumbing down is ridiculous. If you worked with CC standards (I have) and if you've written curriculum using CC (I have), you'd understand that these standards are very complex and rigorous.

But maybe they're too difficult for YOU to grasp?

I don't know about you but I personally love the round-about way of that "CC" does long division with tons of grouping, shapes and diagrams. so fast and methodological.... ha! somewhere the Chinese, SE Asians and Europeans are laughing. hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not support 1040 but FARM data is not very granular. What is the cut off here (< $30,000 [?] and everyone else)? How useful is this...those above and below the poverty line?

What do you think MCPS should use, then?

Here are the income guidelines for qualifying for FARM:

http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/governance/notices/iegs/IEG_Table-032913.pdf