How many fourth graders are put in the Enriched Literacy Curriculum?

[Anonymous]

1 out of 3 classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

They don’t even do the cogat anymore so there is nothing to coach. It’s very hard to prep for the MAP-R. And that was my point. I agree bright kids are missing out because ELC isn’t even offered at many elementary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

They don’t even do the cogat anymore so there is nothing to coach. It’s very hard to prep for the MAP-R. And that was my point. I agree bright kids are missing out because ELC isn’t even offered at many elementary schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

They don’t even do the cogat anymore so there is nothing to coach. It’s very hard to prep for the MAP-R. And that was my point. I agree bright kids are missing out because ELC isn’t even offered at many elementary schools.

It's just a matter of time until they roll out ELC to all schools. It sucks for the kids missing out for the next 2-4 or so years until they roll it out to all schools. But even when ELC is rolled out to all schools, I'm sure DCUM will find something to complain about.

[Anonymous]

My kid is in the 1 classroom doing William & Mary. He reads legit books and has related assignments. It’s dramatically better than Benchmark.

Fun fact: mcps had a work group of teachers review a variety of vendors before selecting benchmark. The work group hated benchmark. Why did they go with it? People should ask mcps. It’s time to launch a mutiny. Benchmark is subpar. It was likely purchased because content was also available in Spanish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in the 1 classroom doing William & Mary. He reads legit books and has related assignments. It’s dramatically better than Benchmark.

Fun fact: mcps had a work group of teachers review a variety of vendors before selecting benchmark. The work group hated benchmark. Why did they go with it? People should ask mcps. It’s time to launch a mutiny. Benchmark is subpar. It was likely purchased because content was also available in Spanish.

Why would they need it in Spanish? Is this for immersion? If so then what about French?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My understanding is that the Enriched Literacy Curriculum is the same curriculum used in the CES and it's for advanced readers. How many fourth graders are put in the Enriched Literacy Curriculum?

All of them. You know the phrase, "no child left behind"...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

I know this is Cold Spring and the thing is the Cold Spring kids are only competing with each other. No other CES has kids who do this and if they do this at Cold Spring who really cares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my son's elementary school, it's everyone including ESOL students.

gross, trolls

PP here. I am telling you the truth. Weird, right? Are we the only elementary school who does this? Parents at our school are confused, too.

We're at a school getting ELC next year and our principal said that all students will do ELC, so your school is not alone in that

This is really sad to hear. This curriculum is wonderful, but it’s not suitable for all students, particularly those at or below grade level. It does not set struggling students up for success, and it does not meet the needs of gifted students who need depth and acceleration on their level and will likely be ignored if the teacher is forced to differentiate greatly within the classroom. Mcps is always saying there’s no one size fits all solution, but they are giving principals such wide latitude on curricula that should be offered equally county-wide that it’s creating this horrible situation of haves and have nots based on nothing.

Maybe you'd be happier if kids could battle it out for spots like in the Hunger Games?

I don’t even know what you mean. If they change the CES to a lottery, and very advanced kids do not win a seat, they are supposed to be guaranteed appropriate accelerated and enriched opportunities at their home school. If everyone is in the “accelerated” class, including students who are English learners, or who are below grade level for whatever reason, I don’t feel as though the class will be able to engage in novel study analysis and related projects that bring the topic to life. It’s not realistic to expect a struggling reader to complete a 250 page book in 3 weeks at home in order to be prepared to do the in class work. It’s also not in the spirit of the ELC curriculum to go from 4-6 books per year down to 1-3 to slow the pace. I don’t think any students should have to battle for spots. I think they should offer ELC at every school for every student with data demonstrating readiness, which is not every student in the school. Right now, some kids got CES, some got ELC, some get Benchmark, which is not suitable for advanced learners, and what you end up getting is in large part based on luck, not meeting the demonstrated needs of the student.

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

I know this is Cold Spring and the thing is the Cold Spring kids are only competing with each other. No other CES has kids who do this and if they do this at Cold Spring who really cares.

Actually it wasn't Cold Spring but a CES in a DCC school.

[Anonymous]

1/4 in my kid’s school (also Silver Spring).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in the 1 classroom doing William & Mary. He reads legit books and has related assignments. It’s dramatically better than Benchmark.

Fun fact: mcps had a work group of teachers review a variety of vendors before selecting benchmark. The work group hated benchmark. Why did they go with it? People should ask mcps. It’s time to launch a mutiny. Benchmark is subpar. It was likely purchased because content was also available in Spanish.

Why would they need it in Spanish? Is this for immersion? If so then what about French?

The county has a growing esol Spanish speaking population. They are creating more bilingual programs aimed at helping those kids succeed. A big part of it is teaching them in their own language.

Oakland Terrace is one of the schools doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

At my kid's CES before the lottery, the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT. About 80% raised their hands. My point is whether this is the best way to determine who those best students are? Many very bright kids are missing out because this is not a level playing field.

They don’t even do the cogat anymore so there is nothing to coach. It’s very hard to prep for the MAP-R. And that was my point. I agree bright kids are missing out because ELC isn’t even offered at many elementary schools.

MAP assessments are achievement tests. They can most certainly be prepped for. That is why school districts use them to measure growth, and to target intervention. Suggesting CogAT can be coached, but MAP can not be, is pure up-is-downism.

PP1, concluding that there is something wrong with CogAT just because "80% raised their hands" when "the teacher asked the class how many kids were coached on the CogAT", does not appear very scientific, to put it mildly.

First of all, I call BS on the number (80%). Even if 80% kids raised their hands (which I don't believe), you have no idea what those kids understood to be coaching; you don't know how many kids raised their hands because they were thinking about the instructions they got before the test about how the test looks like - after all, these kids took the test in class in third grade. You don't know how many kids raised their hands because their parents got a book off amazon to familiarize them with the test. Also, there is no way you can say which kids got in only because of the coaching, and you have no clue how many kids were, as you say, "coached" but ended up not getting in, etc., the kind of data one needs to measure how effective the testing was.

On top of all this, here is the kicker - CogAT is a cognitive abilities test that measures potential. CogAT or similar tests are used in a variety of contexts *because* it is difficult to prep for. Of course, human nature being what it is, you are always going to find people prepping for any test, but in case of CogAT the improvement is marginal at best. It is precisely why administrators do not have to worry as much about getting a distorted picture of someone's potential due to "coaching" as compared to any achievement test. So, yes, it is one of the best ways to identify potential.