MCPS gutting humanities MS magnets and replacing with CKLA? (Are CESes next?)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids in both the STEM and Humanities magnets, and the Humanities program was much better preparation for HS in terms of critical thinking, writing, and organizational skills.

Dismantling this program to provide "grade level" content, which was all know from experience is actually below grade level, makes zero sense.

CKLA is at grade level (not below) but is just that - at grade level. Local schools shoudl provide above grade level enrichment & acceleration, and magnets should be well beyond that.

Are you sure? I've seen parents go through the list of assigned readings in "Advanced" English for grades 6-8 and each of them was below grade level. Are you saying that CKLA is a departure from that trend?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids in both the STEM and Humanities magnets, and the Humanities program was much better preparation for HS in terms of critical thinking, writing, and organizational skills.

Dismantling this program to provide "grade level" content, which was all know from experience is actually below grade level, makes zero sense.

CKLA is at grade level (not below) but is just that - at grade level. Local schools shoudl provide above grade level enrichment & acceleration, and magnets should be well beyond that.

Are you sure? I've seen parents go through the list of assigned readings in "Advanced" English for grades 6-8 and each of them was below grade level. Are you saying that CKLA is a departure from that trend?

Yes I am sure. You are thinking of Study Sync and the novel studies that went along with it, which MCPS created to go with it. CKLA has kids starting Shakespeare in 5th grade. My 8th grader is about to start “Narrativr of the Life of Frederick Douglas.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. As a parents of kids who completely qualified and would have thrived at a CES or MS magnet, I am tired of paying for other kids to get what my kids need, while my kids are ignored. Without magnets there will be more high achievers at my schools.

+1. They could do pull outs for advanced kids at their home schools for far cheaper than what they’re doing for a few lucky kids who get into CES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. As a parents of kids who completely qualified and would have thrived at a CES or MS magnet, I am tired of paying for other kids to get what my kids need, while my kids are ignored. Without magnets there will be more high achievers at my schools.

+1. They could do pull outs for advanced kids at their home schools for far cheaper than what they’re doing for a few lucky kids who get into CES.

I'm in the same position, but I don't think the solution is to gut these programs, as MCPS seems intent on doing. The solution is to improve the selection, while also improving home school offerings so they have a truly advanced class. MCPS, unfortunately, appears to be going in the opposite direction.

[Anonymous]

^^ selection criteria, I mean to say

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the head of AEI, Kristie Clark, has told parents that they are planning to get rid of the current rigorous/advanced humanities curriculum at the middle school magnets and just switch to CKLA (with "enrichment") starting next year (apparently in part because not all of the magnet kids are passing their MCAPs and they think it's because of the current curriculum?)

And then this is just speculation, but reading the tea leaves, I would assume they will roll this approach out to CESes next. And maybe to regular middle schools in place of HiGH too (I think they would have to revise HiGH anyway to meet the new state standards, so I suspect they will just drop it for on-level SS and instead do "enriched" English through CKLA.)

1) Why are they so obsessed with using the on-level CKLA for kids who need enrichment? It seems like a big downgrade at the ES level-- I have heard complaints that kids who loved ELC in 4th have been very disappointed with CKLA in 5th even when cohorted. Is this the typical perception and if so is there a way to come together to communicate that kids, parents, and teachers think that using CKLA in place of a truly enriched curriculum is a bad approach that they should roll back in ES rather than expand to MS?
2). Who is this Kristie Clark person? What is her background? Did she actually study gifted education (I don't see any indication of that) and if so how can she think this is a good plan for gifted kids? Or if she doesn't have a background in gifted education, why is she in charge of the Accelerated and Enriched Instruction office and able to make these decisions?

I think this is the right Kristie Clark? https://www.instagram.com/principalkclark?igsh=M21nYjc1cmhib3o4
https://www.linkedin.com/mwlite/profile/in/kristie-clark-b893956

Looks like she has a bachelors in Information Systems & Decision Science, a masters in Software Engineering, and a masters in Education Administration & Supervision, so I doubt there was time for many if any courses on gifted education in there. Her background in gifted education might just bei that she was principal of an elementary school in PG County for a few years that had a gifted program? Is that really all it takes to be the person in charge of Accelerated and Enriched Instruction for the entire district?

Yes, that is all that it takes in MCPS to direct programs with which she has no content knowledge. Our chief academic officer was an elementary school teacher and she is ultimately in charge of the high school programming changes being devised. Her underlings developing the new program schemes have degrees in human ecology and education (I guess this is sociology about school environments) and the other was a high school social studies teacher. These are bureaucrats adept at navigating large institutions - that's a certain skill, but it's not what we need in people constructing the massive content and logistical changes that are proposed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. As a parents of kids who completely qualified and would have thrived at a CES or MS magnet, I am tired of paying for other kids to get what my kids need, while my kids are ignored. Without magnets there will be more high achievers at my schools.

+1. They could do pull outs for advanced kids at their home schools for far cheaper than what they’re doing for a few lucky kids who get into CES.

CES used to be strictly criteria-based until about 2018-ish. The decision of switching to lottery came together with promise to make local enrichment opportunities available for local ES and MS. It used to work for like 2-3 years, and now every local enrichment opportunity is gone except accelerated math. Your extrapolation that gutting CES = creating more local cohort for acceleration is purely day-dreaming. MCPS can't and will not do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. As a parents of kids who completely qualified and would have thrived at a CES or MS magnet, I am tired of paying for other kids to get what my kids need, while my kids are ignored. Without magnets there will be more high achievers at my schools.

+1. They could do pull outs for advanced kids at their home schools for far cheaper than what they’re doing for a few lucky kids who get into CES.

CES used to be strictly criteria-based until about 2018-ish. The decision of switching to lottery came together with promise to make local enrichment opportunities available for local ES and MS. It used to work for like 2-3 years, and now every local enrichment opportunity is gone except accelerated math. Your extrapolation that gutting CES = creating more local cohort for acceleration is purely day-dreaming. MCPS can't and will not do that.

IIRC, lottery was with the pandemic. They shifted from Highly Gifted Centers (basically, enrichment across all academic subjects) to CES (Humanities-oriented, though often cohorted, anyway, but always saying from that point, "It's not a magnet for math/science.") before that. Around 2018 (not sure which year, but before the pandemic), there was this plan to make it draw only from where a local cohort wasn't avaialble, but that was abandoned, and they turned to locally normalized MAP along with dropping, for a time at least, CogAT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids in both the STEM and Humanities magnets, and the Humanities program was much better preparation for HS in terms of critical thinking, writing, and organizational skills.

Dismantling this program to provide "grade level" content, which was all know from experience is actually below grade level, makes zero sense.

CKLA is at grade level (not below) but is just that - at grade level. Local schools shoudl provide above grade level enrichment & acceleration, and magnets should be well beyond that.

Only if they have enough seats for the population with that need. All with need should be getting it, even if they need to make sure it is available locally to make up for the dearth of magnet seats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. As a parents of kids who completely qualified and would have thrived at a CES or MS magnet, I am tired of paying for other kids to get what my kids need, while my kids are ignored. Without magnets there will be more high achievers at my schools.

+1. They could do pull outs for advanced kids at their home schools for far cheaper than what they’re doing for a few lucky kids who get into CES.

CES used to be strictly criteria-based until about 2018-ish. The decision of switching to lottery came together with promise to make local enrichment opportunities available for local ES and MS. It used to work for like 2-3 years, and now every local enrichment opportunity is gone except accelerated math. Your extrapolation that gutting CES = creating more local cohort for acceleration is purely day-dreaming. MCPS can't and will not do that.

IIRC, lottery was with the pandemic. They shifted from Highly Gifted Centers (basically, enrichment across all academic subjects) to CES (Humanities-oriented, though often cohorted, anyway, but always saying from that point, "It's not a magnet for math/science.") before that. Around 2018 (not sure which year, but before the pandemic), there was this plan to make it draw only from where a local cohort wasn't avaialble, but that was abandoned, and they turned to locally normalized MAP along with dropping, for a time at least, CogAT.

My elder one experienced the first-year of CES, where they changed the name from HGC to CES, but the selection criteria were still MAP + CoGAT (used to be RAVEN, but it's similar to CoGAT). Back then people were arguing about not enough seats at CES, and the METIS report was the last straw. As a response, MCPS switched to the lottery model, and added enrichment for ELA and compact math to local schools. When my younger one joint CES, the quality had apparently watered down. I was at a time regretting to let them go the CES track instead of staying local, but I'm not anymore reading the CKLA feedback. MCPS has visibly declining consistently over my years as a parent, and now it seems that it has finally reached the turning point of scraping out all acceleration paths. Sad but echoing the US economic status. Our children will be mostly fighting for factory worker jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids in both the STEM and Humanities magnets, and the Humanities program was much better preparation for HS in terms of critical thinking, writing, and organizational skills.

Dismantling this program to provide "grade level" content, which was all know from experience is actually below grade level, makes zero sense.

CKLA is at grade level (not below) but is just that - at grade level. Local schools shoudl provide above grade level enrichment & acceleration, and magnets should be well beyond that.

Only if they have enough seats for the population with that need. All with need should be getting it, even if they need to make sure it is available locally to make up for the dearth of magnet seats.

They would if they actually used the right selection criteria.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids in both the STEM and Humanities magnets, and the Humanities program was much better preparation for HS in terms of critical thinking, writing, and organizational skills.

Dismantling this program to provide "grade level" content, which was all know from experience is actually below grade level, makes zero sense.

CKLA is at grade level (not below) but is just that - at grade level. Local schools shoudl provide above grade level enrichment & acceleration, and magnets should be well beyond that.

Are you sure? I've seen parents go through the list of assigned readings in "Advanced" English for grades 6-8 and each of them was below grade level. Are you saying that CKLA is a departure from that trend?

CKLA is brand new in middle school this year (and brand new in elementary school last year.) It does seem like a significant improvement for the on-grade-level kids, in that it is indeed actually on grade level. But it's not above-level and I have no idea why MCPS is so set on using it for above-level kids. (It claims it has enrichment built in, but what that means is that once every day or two there's a "Challenge" question labeled in the teacher's guide prompting them to ask students something like "Why do you think Papi wants Merci to be quiet?" or "Do you think “Main Street” is a good title for this story? Why or why not?")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they’re changing the Eastern magnet, what does that mean for CAP at Blair? Will they change that too?

CAP also would be a regional, so only available in Region 1, right? My guess is that current Eastern magnet students (6th and 7th) who reside outside of region 1 would not be able to apply to CAP. Of course I hope otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like the head of AEI, Kristie Clark, has told parents that they are planning to get rid of the current rigorous/advanced humanities curriculum at the middle school magnets and just switch to CKLA (with "enrichment") starting next year (apparently in part because not all of the magnet kids are passing their MCAPs and they think it's because of the current curriculum?)

And then this is just speculation, but reading the tea leaves, I would assume they will roll this approach out to CESes next. And maybe to regular middle schools in place of HiGH too (I think they would have to revise HiGH anyway to meet the new state standards, so I suspect they will just drop it for on-level SS and instead do "enriched" English through CKLA.)

1) Why are they so obsessed with using the on-level CKLA for kids who need enrichment? It seems like a big downgrade at the ES level-- I have heard complaints that kids who loved ELC in 4th have been very disappointed with CKLA in 5th even when cohorted. Is this the typical perception and if so is there a way to come together to communicate that kids, parents, and teachers think that using CKLA in place of a truly enriched curriculum is a bad approach that they should roll back in ES rather than expand to MS?

My kid LOVED ELC in 4th, and really didn't like CKLA in 5th. Got into the Humanities magnet but didn't want the long commute and humanities only focus as DC is an all rounder and enjoys STEM. Is happy with the home MS but CKLA in 6th seems to be the same - slower pace, at least yet, not a lot of writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If they’re changing the Eastern magnet, what does that mean for CAP at Blair? Will they change that too?

CAP will remain for the new Region 1 as an application program, so far.