Challenge Every Child

[Anonymous]

I think the mid range and lower level kids should be in a group with kids who raise the bar, otherwise the standards and expectations sink too low.

Why is it the job of the higher level kids to help "pull up" the mid and lower level ones? And I disagree that this mixing means teacher teach to the higher level - I think they teach to the middle or the lower end because it's much more difficult when you have half the class lost than if half is simply bored (and the former shows up negatively in testing - the latter would not).

[Anonymous]

PP..I agree. We will not have everyone suddenly engaged in an advanced curriculum. We will have everyone at the middle with the bottom still struggling and the top bored. An earlier poster who mentioned assistance for struggling students is not in touch with the reality of the school system...resource teachers and aides are virtually non-existant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why should any child go to a GT elementary if the middle school is heterogeneous?

There are no "GT" elementaries. There are by-application programs for the Highly Gifted Centers in 4th and 5th grade. These HGC's are available 1 per every few high school clusters, so they require travel and they are usually only 2 classrooms in the bigger elementary. Kids at the HGC can be mixed in with the whole school for specials, etc. At our HGC, the advanced math classes are open to non-HGC students. HGC kids are usually 1-3+ grades ahead in math and 2-10 years ahead in reading level. For example, my child attends an HGC and has been tested as reading at an upper level college/post-graduate level. She would not survive in a regular elementary classroom.

For kids/parents who want more challenge but not as much as the HGC, EVERY elementary school is supposed to provide GT services to those so identified, and even children who have not been "identified" can also opt for these classes. So, if you are in 4th grade but have been ID'd as being capable of skipping to 5th grade math, your local elementary school should do that. If you are a parent and your child has NOT been ID'd as being capable of this but you believe he/she is and you want him to be accelerated, the school is supposed to accommodate you. You might have to have a discussion with the school staff about the indicators of readiness, but in the end this choice is supposed to be yours as a parent. "Providing GT services" can be skipping a math grade, taking a math class that is accelerated (combining 2 years in 1), doing the William and Mary reading program or Great Books, etc.

As for middle school, there are by application academic middle school magnets, but even in a "regular" middle school, advanced classes are offered in English, Science, and World Studies. Some schools label these classes "GT."

[Anonymous]

To PPs who expect teachers to teach to 5 different levels in a classroom, this is totally unrealistic. Have you ever been in a classroom in MoCo? I have spent a lot of time in my son's and what I see is that the teacher teaches 4 reading groups daily. What this means is that each reading group gets about 15 minutes of instruction (less if you figure in the time for transition and to get each new group to settle into the work). While she meets with each reading group, the rest of the class is parked at their desks, assigned a worksheet. When they finish their worksheet they are allowed to do "centers." In reality what this means is that most of the kids are goofing off and talking instead of doing the worksheet, because no one is there to supervise/help. Those that do actually finish it, then get up and wander around the classroom goofing off at the centers. The teacher is stuck trying to listen with one ear to the reading group and keep her eyes on the rest of the class. This means the kids get about 10 minutes of pretty crappy reading instruction 5x a week.

Now imagine if the same 4 teachers in the grade, instead of teaching 4 groups each, all grouped the kids according to ability and could focus on an entire class of kids at the same reading level. The kids would get FAR more direct instruction. The teacher could control the class far better. It would be better for all.

[Anonymous]

12:49: Takoma Park gifted magnet starts in grade 1. Kids test in after KG. This could be the end of all such prgrams though if no more gifted labeling or differentiation is allowed. Read the Challenge Every Child info. My child's middle school (JW) has already ended leveling for everything but math. It is part of a new curriculum enacted within the last few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:12:49: Takoma Park gifted magnet starts in grade 1. Kids test in after KG. This could be the end of all such prgrams though if no more gifted labeling or differentiation is allowed. Read the Challenge Every Child info. My child's middle school (JW) has already ended leveling for everything but math. It is part of a new curriculum enacted within the last few years.

Can somebody provide a link to this Challenge Every Child curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:49: Takoma Park gifted magnet starts in grade 1. Kids test in after KG. This could be the end of all such prgrams though if no more gifted labeling or differentiation is allowed. Read the Challenge Every Child info. My child's middle school (JW) has already ended leveling for everything but math. It is part of a new curriculum enacted within the last few years.

Can somebody provide a link to this Challenge Every Child curriculum?

it's a petition and the link is on the first page of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the situation that already exists at our Silver Spring elem. They are placed into heterogenous homerooms, where they are taught all together for science, social studies and language arts (first half of LA). However, for LA they do have breakout groups for instruction for the second half of the LA block. Some of the groups meet daily (lower reading levels), some meet a few times per week (higher reading levels). They get grouped for math. So, the difference you're talking about is getting rid of groups for math? I can't picture that happening, teaching would be completely impossible, not merely difficult as it is with the other subjects. I do not think that every subject needs to be segregated by level. I think the mid range and lower level kids should be in a group with kids who raise the bar, otherwise the standards and expectations sink too low. I don't think that's a smart way to go as a matter of public education policy. Also, I think if you're in MCPS you need to get used to the idea that you're going to be teaching a lot at home and providing the challenge for your kids. They call it a free education, but it's not.

And what about the high-achieving, GT kids who raise the bar? It is not their job to help their lower-range peers. My son, who was in the GT Center program and who has gone onto a middle school magnet, spent a good part of his time in lower elementary school "helping" his peers because he had mastered the material and the teachers didn't know what else to do with him. This was NOT ok.

Thank God for the Center program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To PPs who expect teachers to teach to 5 different levels in a classroom, this is totally unrealistic. Have you ever been in a classroom in MoCo? I have spent a lot of time in my son's and what I see is that the teacher teaches 4 reading groups daily. What this means is that each reading group gets about 15 minutes of instruction (less if you figure in the time for transition and to get each new group to settle into the work). While she meets with each reading group, the rest of the class is parked at their desks, assigned a worksheet. When they finish their worksheet they are allowed to do "centers." In reality what this means is that most of the kids are goofing off and talking instead of doing the worksheet, because no one is there to supervise/help. Those that do actually finish it, then get up and wander around the classroom goofing off at the centers. The teacher is stuck trying to listen with one ear to the reading group and keep her eyes on the rest of the class. This means the kids get about 10 minutes of pretty crappy reading instruction 5x a week.

Now imagine if the same 4 teachers in the grade, instead of teaching 4 groups each, all grouped the kids according to ability and could focus on an entire class of kids at the same reading level. The kids would get FAR more direct instruction. The teacher could control the class far better. It would be better for all.

I student taught in a 4th grade classroom where we had 3 different reading groups. We called it the 3 ring circus b/c that is what it felt like. It must be even more difficult at lower grades where kids aren't very independent workers. Now that I teach at another school, they group the kids by ability into reading classes so the GT kids go to their reading teacher, the 2 on grade level groups have their teachers and the below grade level kids get the benefit of the reading specialist and a small group. This is a much better system for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To PPs who expect teachers to teach to 5 different levels in a classroom, this is totally unrealistic... The teacher could control the class far better. It would be better for all.

I student taught in a 4th grade classroom where we had 3 different reading groups. We called it the 3 ring circus b/c that is what it felt like. It must be even more difficult at lower grades where kids aren't very independent workers. Now that I teach at another school, they group the kids by ability into reading classes so the GT kids go to their reading teacher, the 2 on grade level groups have their teachers and the below grade level kids get the benefit of the reading specialist and a small group. This is a much better system for everyone.

What school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12:49: Takoma Park gifted magnet starts in grade 1. Kids test in after KG. This could be the end of all such prgrams though if no more gifted labeling or differentiation is allowed. Read the Challenge Every Child info. My child's middle school (JW) has already ended leveling for everything but math. It is part of a new curriculum enacted within the last few years.

Can somebody provide a link to this Challenge Every Child curriculum?

it's a petition and the link is on the first page of this thread.

I know there's a petition. The question is, where on the MCPS website is there a discussion of implementing this curriculum?

[Anonymous]

Challenge Every Child is the name of an approach championed by the Gifted and Talented Association of Montgomery County and supported by MCCPTA.

It is intended to counter a push by other groups called No Labels No Limits which aims to do away with GT screening and ability grouping.

Neither one of these is a policy of MCPS currently. However, the No Labels No Limits/anti GT folks have the ear of some on the school board and county council, and they have been pushing hard for their agenda.

No one wants to label kids or force them into categories that doom them to unchallenging material. But No Labels No Limits has an unrealistic view of what can be done in a classroom by a single teacher, and will end up diluting the quality of an MCPS education. It also ignores the rights of highly able students to an appropriate education. In my opinion, it's a misguided effort that focuses on what you call something rather than how you address real educational challenges in a way that benefits ALL students.

Let's face it folks -- the U.S. is losing educationally compared to our competitor nations. We can't afford to lose a whole generation of smart kids. We have to both raise the level of kids who need extra help and support and challenge those who are highly able. Education isn't one size fits all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you know about this movement which I have heard advocates totally homogeneous (though supposedly advanced) curriculums across the board. Is this the end of reading groups in ES..everyone gets the same instruction whether you come in reading or don't know your letters. How about math? I have heard some middle schools are already doing this with differentiated assignments within a classroom. Is this really happening with huge class sizes or are some kids lost and some kids bored? Or does this just mean they would end all GT centers?

Hi OP! OK, I went and clicked on the link someone posted to the petition asking for the school district to "Challenge Every Child". They don't seem to be asking what you think they are asking for though.

This is what they propose:

One-size-fits-all programming will not close the achievement gap; it only brings frustration and stagnation across the ability spectrum.

We therefore petition the Board of Education to:

1. Continue the Grade 2 identification of gifted and talented students, ?and expand the use of formal instructional recommendations to include future grades;


2. Restore flexible homogeneous grouping of students with peers of similar ability and motivation in all local schools; and

3. Develop, implement and monitor higher level curricula and benchmarks matched to the needs and abilities of gifted children.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like the OP was actually concerned about the No Limits No Labels concept but got the wrong title.

[Anonymous]

Check the Montgomery County Council of PTA's position:

MCCPTA Letter to Board of Education President Chris Barclay regarding "No Labels, No Limits" campaign. March 21, 2011

http://www.mccpta.com/GT_committee/2010-2011/Letter_to_BOE_opposing_no_labels_final.pdf