Looks like ELC is gone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man, the PTA gifted committee worked so hard to get ELC everywhere and now apparently MCPS is getting rid of it just a few years later. Does that committee even do anything anymore? You would think they'd be more active in trying to fight this...

I think it's mainly a Facebook mom social club. They aren't serious about engaging with the community or recruiting help or executing projects.

I have not volunteered (shame on me) but I see them recruiting all the time. They begged folks to get involved in the question of differentiating ELA at the MS and early HS levels and I'm not sure anyone ever did.

They are also the only reason we know the "tiers" of schools in CES and magnet MS evaluations, and the cut-offs for each at least for one year.

The problem with an initiative led by parents, though, is that kids grow up or jobs change and people have less time than they used to, and if a new generation of activists doesn't step in, initiatives die.

The problem is MCPS should be doing this Full time job, not parents who do not work for MCPS!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the timeline slide, it says "Students identified for enrichment in the Central Review participate in ELC at their local school OR at a regional CES program."

That's the same graphic from last year, they almost certainly just accidentally forgot to delete that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we know whether schools that want to keep ELC will be given that option? Has anyone emailed [e-mail] or [e-mail] to ask?

Who is in charge of these decisions? Is it Kristie Clark and the AEI office? Maybe it is not set in stone yet and if a lot of people complain we can ask them to change things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the timeline slide, it says "Students identified for enrichment in the Central Review participate in ELC at their local school OR at a regional CES program."

That's the same graphic from last year, they almost certainly just accidentally forgot to delete that.

+1
They removed all mention of ELC elsewhere for 25-26. This looks like an oversight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the timeline slide, it says "Students identified for enrichment in the Central Review participate in ELC at their local school OR at a regional CES program."

That's the same graphic from last year, they almost certainly just accidentally forgot to delete that.

+1
They removed all mention of ELC elsewhere for 25-26. This looks like an oversight.

They also mention ELC at the very end, and include a link to the ELC website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the timeline slide, it says "Students identified for enrichment in the Central Review participate in ELC at their local school OR at a regional CES program."

That's the same graphic from last year, they almost certainly just accidentally forgot to delete that.

+1
They removed all mention of ELC elsewhere for 25-26. This looks like an oversight.

They also mention ELC at the very end, and include a link to the ELC website.

Looks like reused footage from last year to me? Last year's link: https://youtu.be/iUJgmzDVpbU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man, the PTA gifted committee worked so hard to get ELC everywhere and now apparently MCPS is getting rid of it just a few years later. Does that committee even do anything anymore? You would think they'd be more active in trying to fight this...

I think it's mainly a Facebook mom social club. They aren't serious about engaging with the community or recruiting help or executing projects.

I have not volunteered (shame on me) but I see them recruiting all the time. They begged folks to get involved in the question of differentiating ELA at the MS and early HS levels and I'm not sure anyone ever did.

They are also the only reason we know the "tiers" of schools in CES and magnet MS evaluations, and the cut-offs for each at least for one year.

The problem with an initiative led by parents, though, is that kids grow up or jobs change and people have less time than they used to, and if a new generation of activists doesn't step in, initiatives die.

The problem is MCPS should be doing this Full time job, not parents who do not work for MCPS!

Bingo.

MCPS does not have a commitment to this. The AEI office is just so weak -- they are not the decision-makers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we know whether schools that want to keep ELC will be given that option? Has anyone emailed [e-mail] or [e-mail] to ask?

Who is in charge of these decisions? Is it Kristie Clark and the AEI office? Maybe it is not set in stone yet and if a lot of people complain we can ask them to change things?

No, it is higher up in OCIP. AEI can provide support but does not make decisions.

People should be going straight to Taylor and cc-ing all of the OCIP staff.

[Anonymous]

They had all this time to make a video. Why would they not at least edit it correctly. So unorganized.

[Anonymous]

Offering enrichment opportunities to higher achieving students simply makes the Achievement Gap worse.

MCPS has been clear that the states goal is to reduce/eliminate the Achievement/Opportunity Gap.

It should be no surprise that they would happily cut an enrichment program that benefits higher performing students.

[Anonymous]

On second thought, their vague language allows individual schools to decide whether they will do CKLA with supposed differentiation or keep ELC.

[Anonymous]

I fought hard to make sure that if ELC was offered at my elementary school, that the Principal implements it. Luckily they did and my DS LOVED it. Benchmark was so bad. He is in 6th grade now and hates his "Advanced" English class - they are doing things he learned in 4th grade ELC. We heard that his elementary school isn't doing ELC anymore and we thank our lucky stars that he had it for the 2 years it was offered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Man, the PTA gifted committee worked so hard to get ELC everywhere and now apparently MCPS is getting rid of it just a few years later. Does that committee even do anything anymore? You would think they'd be more active in trying to fight this...

Omg F off. Why the F does PTA even need to work on this? Are they employees of MCPS? Why can't the system recognize there are students who need higher level curriculum and provide that level while still tending to students who need more assistance in meeting "standards."?

Whoa, calm down! Yes of course MCPS should do this right without parents having to advocate, but it's still a valid question to ask whether there likely have been/will be parents in the PTA advocating around this or not. Or is it just that there were a few specific people active in the PTA on this in the past who are no longer active, so it's less likely to happen?

(How can we as new people step up and get involved? I am not our school's gifted PTA liaison, are there any other ways?)

[Anonymous]

If you are upset then get in touch with Taylor and the BOE. This is not a surprise to me. There have been other threads throughout this year that that have said ELC will be gone because central office is replacing it with the CKLA base plus enrichment during WIN time. CKLA has been much better than Benchmark for my kids, and our school does a good job actually offering enrichment in WIN time. But if yours doesn’t, then advocate for changes that meet the needs of your kids. Without a strong push among many parents, MCPS will not change this.

[Anonymous]

This video isn't new it existed last year and was played last year. If you look at the timeline in the video the last dates are for SY24-25. Too, once again, if you are really concerned about ELC, bring it up with your ES teacher, principal, and Reading Specialist.