More evidence that 2.0 and Starr is backward looking

[Anonymous]

If your child loves to read by the time they finish school, consider that a miracle. If you actually measured how much time is spent actually reading in school (and I don't mean reading directions for a task/activity), it wouldn't amount to much. So much time is spent talking about reading and teaching reading strategies that very little time is spent actually reading. Reading for fun at school? Maybe if your kids go to schools with high test scores. But reading for fun is almost nonexistent in other schools. It is a shame. Thankfully, my son pretty much taught himself how to read before kindergarten b/c all of his friends hate to read. So what they are doing at school isn't creating lifelong learners at all. I agree w/ a PP that I would hate school too if I was a student now.

[Anonymous]

I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

[Anonymous]

14"45 I am laughing because we feel our kids spend too much of the day reading for fun. I guess when they are finished with something they are allowed to read. Sometimes they read a whole book over the course of a day. It is nice that they love to read but I would rather they did that at home and were taught at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:14"45 I am laughing because we feel our kids spend too much of the day reading for fun. I guess when they are finished with something they are allowed to read. Sometimes they read a whole book over the course of a day. It is nice that they love to read but I would rather they did that at home and were taught at school.

That's just it. This is not just 2.0 though 2.0 made it worse. Teachers have stopped teaching. Much of the class time has been replaced by God knows what. Talking about which number is the favorite number perhaps. With in class differentiation, the direct instruction time is going to go down even more. Research, however, shows that direct instruction is still the best way to impart knowledge. While I appreciate all the other goals they may have, the primary objective of education should still be impart knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

China and Europe must be laughing their arses off at how behind our curriculum now is. Unless they too recently revamped to massively slow down, cover less topics, and teach to the bottom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

China and Europe must be laughing their arses off at how behind our curriculum now is. Unless they too recently revamped to massively slow down, cover less topics, and teach to the bottom.

2.0 is terrible for the kids who really love math and would have been the ones in the advanced math under the old curriculum. I agree with making sure that the kids are getting a good foundation, but my first grader loves math and is bored in class. Like i do, he has thatbkind f a mind. Once taught he just gets it- he wamts to do multiplication and division. He hasn't learn one thing in math this year that he couldn't do by October. I am teaching him at home the things that my older child did in first grade when she was given 2 nd grade math--
I am looking for math camps for next summer-- ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

It really depends what learning fraction means. If it is just naming tem off a pizza, my 4 year old could do that and understand since last year.

[Anonymous]

To the disgruntled, you'll spend less energy being angry and stressed if you teach your kids the things you want them to learn at home. Take 10 minutes a day and teach your favorite concepts, make it fun, and stop worrying. Before 2.0 my child was being taught a bunch of pointless crap that I didn't want him to be learning. There will always be frustrations with a school. DIY can take the edge off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the disgruntled, you'll spend less energy being angry and stressed if you teach your kids the things you want them to learn at home. Take 10 minutes a day and teach your favorite concepts, make it fun, and stop worrying. Before 2.0 my child was being taught a bunch of pointless crap that I didn't want him to be learning. There will always be frustrations with a school. DIY can take the edge off.

Are you implying after 2.0 that your child is only taut useful things now?

[Anonymous]

They haven't started 2.0 in the higher grades.

[Anonymous]

And then you need to wait until next year when 2.0 starts and see how you feel then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:14"45 I am laughing because we feel our kids spend too much of the day reading for fun. I guess when they are finished with something they are allowed to read. Sometimes they read a whole book over the course of a day. It is nice that they love to read but I would rather they did that at home and were taught at school.

That's just it. This is not just 2.0 though 2.0 made it worse. Teachers have stopped teaching. Much of the class time has been replaced by God knows what. Talking about which number is the favorite number perhaps. With in class differentiation, the direct instruction time is going to go down even more. Research, however, shows that direct instruction is still the best way to impart knowledge. While I appreciate all the other goals they may have, the primary objective of education should still be impart knowledge.

Is this problem avoided in the HGC program? It seems that there shouldn't be much need for differentiation there so there should be more class time for direct instruction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Preschools in Finland and much of Europe are all play based. They do not teach letters or numbers until age 7, when children are developmentally ready to learn to read, and they learn quickly at that point. What distinguished Finland most is the social aspects of learning. Social development is a huge priority there, whereas here it is completely ignored. I just heard about a study showing that classrooms that emphasized social and emotional learning had fewer behavior problems and better academic learning. As far as math, I have heard that some high school teachers in MCPS and univ. profs say that MCPS pushes kids to be accelerated at the expense of developing a proper foundation in math. They get kids who think they are advanced, they've been pushed to get past calculus, bla bla bla, and in fact are unprepared and have major gaps. So acceleration may not be as great as some think it is.

+1 Truth. From a mom of accelerated math kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

China and Europe must be laughing their arses off at how behind our curriculum now is. Unless they too recently revamped to massively slow down, cover less topics, and teach to the bottom.

+1

[Anonymous]

Preschools in Finland and much of Europe are all play based. They do not teach letters or numbers until age 7, when children are developmentally ready to learn to read, and they learn quickly at that point. What distinguished Finland most is the social aspects of learning. Social development is a huge priority there, whereas here it is completely ignored. I just heard about a study showing that classrooms that emphasized social and emotional learning had fewer behavior problems and better academic learning. As far as math, I have heard that some high school teachers in MCPS and univ. profs say that MCPS pushes kids to be accelerated at the expense of developing a proper foundation in math. They get kids who think they are advanced, they've been pushed to get past calculus, bla bla bla, and in fact are unprepared and have major gaps. So acceleration may not be as great as some think it is.

Which Asians are too accelerated and advanced in math with lots of gaps?