Chief Academic Officer: "anti-racism" and "equity" are "key considerations". "Academic achievement" is not.

[Anonymous]

I saw this document today:

https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHWJAX4BF0EB/$file/written%20testimony%20Diana%20Avram.pdf

It states that "anti-racism" and "equity" are "key considerations". "Academic achievement" is not.

Here is the text from the document.

PAGE 1
June 24, 2025 Written Testimony on CKLA by Diana Avram Thank you to Dr. Taylor and the board of education. My name is Diana Avram and I am a parent of two students enrolled in MCPS. I would like to discuss the issue of MCPS allowing principals to choose between two models of offering enrichment within the new ELA curriculum. Model 1 offers a cohorted enrichment opportunity similar to ELC which has a proven track record of meeting the needs of gifted and advanced learners with a teacher who is certified in gifted education. Model 2 is heterogeneous grouped classes with teachers spending time to help students with learning disabilities, English as Second Language and those below proficiency with the goal of reaching grade benchmark, while also offering enrichment and discussions for the advanced learners in the same classroom. I recently wrote to you asking about the guidance the principals are given to make their decision between the two models. I received an email from a BOE umbudsperson explaining that central office had provided principals with the criteria and guidance which included "A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment". This email is a part of my written testimony.





I ask again, what data is MCPS using to make this guidance. Why is model 2 stated as the preference for principals? When I asked central office what the data showed regarding gifted students' growth in a heterogeneous model, I was told there was none to review. If no data is collected nor reviewed, then the only objective way MCPS and the public can know if the gifted and accelerated students are receiving appropriate enrichment is by parent surveys. The GEC MCCPTA has testified that over 70% of parents reported by survey that their child was not receiving any enrichment under the past heterogeneous model of Benchmark which is why the community fought hard to have ELC implemented in the schools.





The MCPS Future Ready 2025-2030 strategic plans state a goal to "Ensure meaningful post-secondary outcomes for all students", and with that in mind, MCPS has promised "All students will have access to be successful in challenging, advanced learning opportunities that prepare them for high quality post-secondary outcomes". This goal does not align with denying the gifted and advanced students the opportunity to be in a cohorted accelerated environment where they will be challenged and can reach higher potential. The CES programs only services a very small percentage of students who would benefit from this type of environment. I would also like to see meaningful honors




PAGE 2
and accelerated English classes throughout middle school and high school. MCPS has stated as a goal that all students will demonstrate high levels of academic achievement and growth- I would like to see MCPS collect and review data on academic growth for our gifted and accelerated students. MCPS should be interested in the growth and academic achievement of all of their students as each child deserves to be challenged in order to reach their full potential.



Federal definition of gifted: Students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services and activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. https://nagc.org/page/myths-about-gifted-students


PAGE 3
Good afternoon Ms. Avram,

AEI and the PreK-12 Curriculum Office have provided principals with the models, criteria, and guidance needed to support decision-making. Principals are expected to select a model-or a combination of models-that best meets the needs of their students while ensuring every learner continues to receive high-quality enriched instruction. An overview of the models may be found here. Schools are required to report their selected models by June 13th.

Ms. Niki Hazel, Chief Academic Officer, provided an update to the Board on Friday, which included several key considerations guiding these decisions:

* The instructional strengths and capacity of the school's teaching staff
* The ability to differentiate effectively in a heterogeneous classroom
* The use of cluster grouping strategies that preserve elements of student cohorting
* A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment

The CAO did not directly explain the meaning of that babble jargon, but did provide a "web link" that, in the published PDF document, isn't actually a link to anywhere.

Enrichment is only available on "pause-point days", not during regular instructional days.

A commitment to classroom composition that better reflects the overall diversity of the school community, aligned with MCPS's anti-racist and equity-centered practices

[Anonymous]

Your post is misleading. The words that you put in quotations in the subject don't appear anywhere in the response. They are your words, not the CAO's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your post is misleading. The words that you put in quotations in the subject don't appear anywhere in the response. They are your words, not the CAO's.

Yes. This was my thought exactly.

Also, your title implies that the specific words “academic achievement” is the only term that can describe academic outcomes.

It’s post like this, which intentionally misrepresent facts, that ultimately undermine the cause of the families that are fighting to keep the magnets or whatever else they want to fight MCPS about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw this document today:

https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHWJAX4BF0EB/$file/written%20testimony%20Diana%20Avram.pdf

It states that "anti-racism" and "equity" are "key considerations". "Academic achievement" is not.

Here is the text from the document.

PAGE 1
June 24, 2025 Written Testimony on CKLA by Diana Avram Thank you to Dr. Taylor and the board of education. My name is Diana Avram and I am a parent of two students enrolled in MCPS. I would like to discuss the issue of MCPS allowing principals to choose between two models of offering enrichment within the new ELA curriculum. Model 1 offers a cohorted enrichment opportunity similar to ELC which has a proven track record of meeting the needs of gifted and advanced learners with a teacher who is certified in gifted education. Model 2 is heterogeneous grouped classes with teachers spending time to help students with learning disabilities, English as Second Language and those below proficiency with the goal of reaching grade benchmark, while also offering enrichment and discussions for the advanced learners in the same classroom. I recently wrote to you asking about the guidance the principals are given to make their decision between the two models. I received an email from a BOE umbudsperson explaining that central office had provided principals with the criteria and guidance which included "A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment". This email is a part of my written testimony.





I ask again, what data is MCPS using to make this guidance. Why is model 2 stated as the preference for principals? When I asked central office what the data showed regarding gifted students' growth in a heterogeneous model, I was told there was none to review. If no data is collected nor reviewed, then the only objective way MCPS and the public can know if the gifted and accelerated students are receiving appropriate enrichment is by parent surveys. The GEC MCCPTA has testified that over 70% of parents reported by survey that their child was not receiving any enrichment under the past heterogeneous model of Benchmark which is why the community fought hard to have ELC implemented in the schools.





The MCPS Future Ready 2025-2030 strategic plans state a goal to "Ensure meaningful post-secondary outcomes for all students", and with that in mind, MCPS has promised "All students will have access to be successful in challenging, advanced learning opportunities that prepare them for high quality post-secondary outcomes". This goal does not align with denying the gifted and advanced students the opportunity to be in a cohorted accelerated environment where they will be challenged and can reach higher potential. The CES programs only services a very small percentage of students who would benefit from this type of environment. I would also like to see meaningful honors




PAGE 2
and accelerated English classes throughout middle school and high school. MCPS has stated as a goal that all students will demonstrate high levels of academic achievement and growth- I would like to see MCPS collect and review data on academic growth for our gifted and accelerated students. MCPS should be interested in the growth and academic achievement of all of their students as each child deserves to be challenged in order to reach their full potential.



Federal definition of gifted: Students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services and activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. https://nagc.org/page/myths-about-gifted-students


PAGE 3
Good afternoon Ms. Avram,

AEI and the PreK-12 Curriculum Office have provided principals with the models, criteria, and guidance needed to support decision-making. Principals are expected to select a model-or a combination of models-that best meets the needs of their students while ensuring every learner continues to receive high-quality enriched instruction. An overview of the models may be found here. Schools are required to report their selected models by June 13th.

Ms. Niki Hazel, Chief Academic Officer, provided an update to the Board on Friday, which included several key considerations guiding these decisions:

* The instructional strengths and capacity of the school's teaching staff
* The ability to differentiate effectively in a heterogeneous classroom
* The use of cluster grouping strategies that preserve elements of student cohorting
* A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment

The CAO did not directly explain the meaning of that babble jargon, but did provide a "web link" that, in the published PDF document, isn't actually a link to anywhere.

Enrichment is only available on "pause-point days", not during regular instructional days.

A commitment to classroom composition that better reflects the overall diversity of the school community, aligned with MCPS's anti-racist and equity-centered practices

We have been in MCPS for a decade and of course, this is very much the case.

If MCPS cared about 'academic achievement' more, they would work on ways to show that students of ALL races were improving. Instead they have spent the past decade focusing on 'closing the Achievement Gap'. Two very different missions. It is not a secret and this is not a revelation to anyone who has been paying attention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your post is misleading. The words that you put in quotations in the subject don't appear anywhere in the response. They are your words, not the CAO's.

Yes. This was my thought exactly.

Also, your title implies that the specific words “academic achievement” is the only term that can describe academic outcomes.

It’s post like this, which intentionally misrepresent facts, that ultimately undermine the cause of the families that are fighting to keep the magnets or whatever else they want to fight MCPS about.

+100

[Anonymous]

My child is getting less enrichment under this new model than last year. At least they read a book in FIT once a week last year.
This year, FIT is everyday but they are working on wiring answers to math problems that ask you to explain your answer. When I questioned the teacher and reading specialist she gave me the jargon about “overlays during tier 1 instruction”. The ELA teacher wrote me back privately and said they would switch from math enrichment to reading a book in Q2.

I will continue to call MCPS a bunch of liars if they keep up the facade of children getting ELA enrichment in any model that isn’t cohorted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw this document today:

https://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DHWJAX4BF0EB/$file/written%20testimony%20Diana%20Avram.pdf

It states that "anti-racism" and "equity" are "key considerations". "Academic achievement" is not.

Here is the text from the document.

PAGE 1
June 24, 2025 Written Testimony on CKLA by Diana Avram Thank you to Dr. Taylor and the board of education. My name is Diana Avram and I am a parent of two students enrolled in MCPS. I would like to discuss the issue of MCPS allowing principals to choose between two models of offering enrichment within the new ELA curriculum. Model 1 offers a cohorted enrichment opportunity similar to ELC which has a proven track record of meeting the needs of gifted and advanced learners with a teacher who is certified in gifted education. Model 2 is heterogeneous grouped classes with teachers spending time to help students with learning disabilities, English as Second Language and those below proficiency with the goal of reaching grade benchmark, while also offering enrichment and discussions for the advanced learners in the same classroom. I recently wrote to you asking about the guidance the principals are given to make their decision between the two models. I received an email from a BOE umbudsperson explaining that central office had provided principals with the criteria and guidance which included "A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment". This email is a part of my written testimony.





I ask again, what data is MCPS using to make this guidance. Why is model 2 stated as the preference for principals? When I asked central office what the data showed regarding gifted students' growth in a heterogeneous model, I was told there was none to review. If no data is collected nor reviewed, then the only objective way MCPS and the public can know if the gifted and accelerated students are receiving appropriate enrichment is by parent surveys. The GEC MCCPTA has testified that over 70% of parents reported by survey that their child was not receiving any enrichment under the past heterogeneous model of Benchmark which is why the community fought hard to have ELC implemented in the schools.





The MCPS Future Ready 2025-2030 strategic plans state a goal to "Ensure meaningful post-secondary outcomes for all students", and with that in mind, MCPS has promised "All students will have access to be successful in challenging, advanced learning opportunities that prepare them for high quality post-secondary outcomes". This goal does not align with denying the gifted and advanced students the opportunity to be in a cohorted accelerated environment where they will be challenged and can reach higher potential. The CES programs only services a very small percentage of students who would benefit from this type of environment. I would also like to see meaningful honors




PAGE 2
and accelerated English classes throughout middle school and high school. MCPS has stated as a goal that all students will demonstrate high levels of academic achievement and growth- I would like to see MCPS collect and review data on academic growth for our gifted and accelerated students. MCPS should be interested in the growth and academic achievement of all of their students as each child deserves to be challenged in order to reach their full potential.



Federal definition of gifted: Students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who need services and activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. https://nagc.org/page/myths-about-gifted-students


PAGE 3
Good afternoon Ms. Avram,

AEI and the PreK-12 Curriculum Office have provided principals with the models, criteria, and guidance needed to support decision-making. Principals are expected to select a model-or a combination of models-that best meets the needs of their students while ensuring every learner continues to receive high-quality enriched instruction. An overview of the models may be found here. Schools are required to report their selected models by June 13th.

Ms. Niki Hazel, Chief Academic Officer, provided an update to the Board on Friday, which included several key considerations guiding these decisions:

* The instructional strengths and capacity of the school's teaching staff
* The ability to differentiate effectively in a heterogeneous classroom
* The use of cluster grouping strategies that preserve elements of student cohorting
* A preference for the flexibility of Model 2, which includes pause-point days for reteaching or enrichment

The CAO did not directly explain the meaning of that babble jargon, but did provide a "web link" that, in the published PDF document, isn't actually a link to anywhere.

Enrichment is only available on "pause-point days", not during regular instructional days.

A commitment to classroom composition that better reflects the overall diversity of the school community, aligned with MCPS's anti-racist and equity-centered practices

Yes. If you've had children in the school system for any length of time you know how bad it is. This isnt new, its just being reiterated. The funny part is they have been pushing feel good politics over academic excellence for many years, but cant show a single positive effect of it.

[Anonymous]

MCPS removing rigor is very real, but it has absolutely nothing to do with equity or closing achievement gaps. It's the horrible dumbed-down curriculums being purchased. Benchmark is one of the biggest offenders. Can't assign supplemental book readings when you're required to make your students click around on their Chromebook all day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Your post is misleading. The words that you put in quotations in the subject don't appear anywhere in the response. They are your words, not the CAO's.

Yeah that's entirely the point. "Academic achievement" is not the words the Chief Academic Officer uses to describe their goals.