I have average-bright kids and I hate Starr and 2.0 too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Commenter at 11:03: what evidence do you have that C2.0 is putting children on computers more than the previous curriculum?

My pre-C2.0 child was in the computer lab once a week. My C2.0 child is in the computer lab once a week.

Or is it just that, if something isn't right, it must be the fault of C2.0?

Look, if they were not in computer lab more than the previous poster cannot be right. They are not doing more writing than before. My problem is not with computers. When students this age and skill level learn writing on a computer, they are not learning to write. They are learning how to use a computer. Writing on a piece of paper will make them focus more on writing a story or an essay.

That may be good things happening under 2.0 but I just haven't heard of much. There are a ton of bad things you hear of though.

[Anonymous]

"Look, if they were not in computer lab more than the previous poster cannot be right. They are not doing more writing than before. "

They are doing more writing. Some of this writing is being done on the computer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Look, if they were not in computer lab more than the previous poster cannot be right. They are not doing more writing than before. "

They are doing more writing. Some of this writing is being done on the computer.

They are doing more writing but not spending more time on the computer. Then they weren't doing something else. Could that be math?

[Anonymous]

So doing more writing is bad, because they might be doing less math?

What other good things are bad because C2.0 is doing them?

[Anonymous]

This is danger of writing on DCUM because you never know who you are responding to. Okay, let me recap. The OP said that her kid was not doing enough writing. Then this teacher claims that 2.0 make kids write on computers. I pointed out that is not the best way to teach writing at this level. Then this poster (was it you) said that their kids are not spending more time on computers. Then I said that well then they cannot be doing more writing. Then she said that they are doing more writing. Well, since time is fixed, then something else must not be eliminated. Since everyone else says math is slow for 2.0, and math is easier to do on computers, I am asking whether that is the case.

I honestly don't care how much time they spend on computers. Hopefully not too much because technology has not been proven to help with anything other than using that technology. My main point was and is that using computer to teach writing is not a good idea.

[Anonymous]

A agree. Technology is a distraction from learning. Sure, teach kids to look things up with google. What else do you need it for? It will all be obselete by the time these kids are in middle school. Teach them to print, write in cursive, figure out math problems on paper, organize their thoughts on paper, edit, draw, etc.

[Anonymous]

Need to focus on technology and not writing because the kids who don't have computers or smartphones ar home need to get practice.
Just another socialist achievement gap initiative.

[Anonymous]

2nd graders at our school were allowed to use the computer lab to look up facts about a subject or definitions from an on-line dictionary. Most assessments are done on the computer so the one computer lab is usually booked with some sort of testing. The work that they are doing on the computers doesn't bother me but its bull shit that they are doing more writing!! Unless they are writing in invisible ink or there is some new rule that writing samples must never be sent home, there simply is much less than in years prior to 2.0. There is virtually no writing homework ever just spelling practice that may every few months include a worksheet to write a letter.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the pp. My 3rd grader hardly ever brings any writing home. Either the teachers are keeping it (I've asked and this isn't the case) or they aren't doing it (that's the reality). There is a lot of rhetoric in 2.0 that says kids will "go deeper" and "write more" etc., it just isn't true.

[Anonymous]

We were thinking of buying a home in Bethesda, but all this negative talk about 2.0 has made us reconsider. We are now thinking of McLean.
Is it really that bad? The few people we have spoken with in person have no issues with it. I don't want to be in a situation where I regret
having my children at Montgomery County schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were thinking of buying a home in Bethesda, but all this negative talk about 2.0 has made us reconsider. We are now thinking of McLean.
Is it really that bad? The few people we have spoken with in person have no issues with it. I don't want to be in a situation where I regret
having my children at Montgomery County schools.

I wouldn't make any real estate decision based on anything you read on an anonymous board. You could easily hear the same things amongst a group of parents in McLean or in DC (substitute 2.0 for whatever their gripe is). For that matter, read the private school boards and you'll think that everyone with kids there is going broke or being duped for NOT sending their kids to MoCo schools. Pick your house/school/community based on what you like and want not based on the complaints of strangers. There are probably more parents who are perfectly happy with 2.0 but they aren't going to post about how well something is working. People with complaints are always more likely to post/complain than people who are happy. Take everything you read with a grain of salt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were thinking of buying a home in Bethesda, but all this negative talk about 2.0 has made us reconsider. We are now thinking of McLean.
Is it really that bad? The few people we have spoken with in person have no issues with it. I don't want to be in a situation where I regret
having my children at Montgomery County schools.

I would live in McLean before Bethesda in a heartbeat. Maryland politics are becoming an embarrassment. MCPS is overcrowded and underfunded where it matters. The only kids that make it in MC are the poor for free food and easier school work. The middle class get the shaft and most upper middle class and higher do private schools.

[Anonymous]

I am sad to say this but I do think NOVA is probably better than MCPS at this point. My hope is that sooner or later the Montgomery county parents are going to revolt to such a degree that the MCPS will have to change back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were thinking of buying a home in Bethesda, but all this negative talk about 2.0 has made us reconsider. We are now thinking of McLean.
Is it really that bad? The few people we have spoken with in person have no issues with it. I don't want to be in a situation where I regret
having my children at Montgomery County schools.

I would live in McLean before Bethesda in a heartbeat. Maryland politics are becoming an embarrassment. MCPS is overcrowded and underfunded where it matters. The only kids that make it in MC are the poor for free food and easier school work. The middle class get the shaft and most upper middle class and higher do private schools.

+100

There is no way I would move and pay Bethesda prices to go to public schools there. I rather live in NOVA or somewhere cheaper and use the extra money to go to private school.

[Anonymous]

I don't know..when I read the VA board with all the craziness people go through over getting their kids in to the gifted program..which seems to include a huge portion on the population so doesn't seem to signify much..I am glad to be in MD.