Reading groups being slowed down?

[Anonymous]

My 2nd grader's last report card had a note that he is reading at the 4th grade level (Q), even though the chart only shows up to 3rd grade.

[Anonymous]

My Kindergartner was assessed at Level 16 but we were told that since that level is the highest level for 1st grade, that they don't test beyond that. It's kind of annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a third grader and I have noticed a reading level cap at one year above grade level at our school every single year. It appears that some schools cap the levels and some do not. Every year my son has been in the highest group, and every year kids who were in a lower group the year before move up to his group, but the kids who have always been in the highest group, have no where to go and are not being challenged with their reading….very disappointing and unfair that the needs of the top kids are not being met.

Was this better before 2.0? Sad to say both my kid and I have given up on any sort of challenging reading at school.

Good news! You can read challenging books at home!

[Anonymous]

Why would a school do this? My DC isn't school-age yet, but I occasionally read threads about elementary level issues. Assuming this thread is accurate, why would schools want to hold kids back from challenging themselves?

This might be a naive question, sorry if so.

[Anonymous]

Dumbing down the curriculum for the illegals who are dragging the whole county down. They need to get these ESOL kids to actually understand English in the early grades so they can stop bombing the standardized tests and keep our county looking "progressive" and not stale. But that means they don't have time to increase the reading levels of the kids who are already test ready. They flatline them. They do more bust work in class while the other reading groups get more time. It sucks. They need to separate home rooms according to reading level. The whole blended classrooms is a PC nightmare.

[Anonymous]

^^busy not bust work.

[Anonymous]

At our school, reading groups were capped before 2.0 and are still capped. I think it really depends on the school.

[Anonymous]

Why would a school do this? My DC isn't school-age yet, but I occasionally read threads about elementary level issues. Assuming this thread is accurate, why would schools want to hold kids back from challenging themselves?

This might be a naive question, sorry if so.

1. The schools don't have the staff to differentiate and the system is designed to make sure all kids hit a baseline not do the best that they can achieve.

If your kid is in a higher level reading group they are working independently. As long as they are well-behaved, they do the work but they are not receiving any instruction or effective guidance. They only benefit from being able to read more complex text and answer more complex questions. As long as they can learn on their own they can progress but once that stops they sit at the same level. The teacher only gets involved if they fall far enough to be near the baseline.

2. There are incentives in the system for teachers and principals to hold kids back. It looks very bad for a child to show no or very little progress in reading levels once they hit 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. If you cap high readers to only 1 year above grade level you protect the next teacher and school for the following the year. The child magically goes up another grade level. A first grader reading at a 3rd grade level is a real problem for a 2nd grade or 3rd grade teacher.

3. MCPS is very clear in achievement gap goals. In schools with a mix of lower SES kids who don't have the advantage of parents reading at home and higher SES kids with parents who do read at home, there is a HUGE incentive to cap at one year. The schools don't have the resources to actually close the achievement gap but they are held accountable for doing it. They will simply hold back the kids who are reading at a higher level and they met their goal of reducing the gap.

This happened first with math on a county-wide level. Math was more obvious because kids were placed in different classes. Reading groups were originally left alone by 2.0 and the politics of doctoring your numbers to close the gap but now 2.0 is working its way into those as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My Kindergartner was assessed at Level 16 but we were told that since that level is the highest level for 1st grade, that they don't test beyond that. It's kind of annoying.

My K was assessed at 14, but we were also told that she would not be tested past 16. I understand that part of it is assessing her written work, so we're working on that.

As far as why this is, I agree with the PPs. There just isn't enough differentiation. The kids who need the help reading get the teacher's time and attention. Our K teacher has to get ALL the kids in the class up to level 6 (I think?). So, she spends the most time with the kids who are below that level. Anyone above that level is left alone. Our K class has two reading groups that read above level 6, and they rarely meet - maybe once every other week?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school do this? My DC isn't school-age yet, but I occasionally read threads about elementary level issues. Assuming this thread is accurate, why would schools want to hold kids back from challenging themselves?

This might be a naive question, sorry if so.

I'm not sure anyone here knows for sure. When I have asked the story I get from teachers and the principal is that the writing needs to be inline with the reading so the kids at the top might not be moving ahead in reading but they are working on their writing. I only partially buy that explanation because there are kids that can do the writing at a higher level. They are not being tested so its not an option for them. I would love my kid to be reading more challenging stuff so he could work on his vocabulary. So yes, we do read at home instead. There is definitely a concentration on the kids at bottom. Not sure I completely buy the rumors that this is part of a big plan to cover up the achievement gap, but I entertain the idea that it is possible.

[Anonymous]

Give yourself a few years in MCPS and you'll more than "entertain" the idea. I've seen my high - achieving kids stagnate in classes where no new concepts are introduced (math) and where the good readers sit quietly and so worksheets while the teachers teach the underachieving kids.
It begins to feel as if the classroom is meant to teach the bottom/middle of he class and the smart/higher-achievers are on their own. And, please don't suggest all those kids simply jump to very expensive private schools. The public system exists to TEACH kids. To dumb down the curriculum and then (maybe) hope anyone expecting more will opt out is just wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Give yourself a few years in MCPS and you'll more than "entertain" the idea. I've seen my high - achieving kids stagnate in classes where no new concepts are introduced (math) and where the good readers sit quietly and so worksheets while the teachers teach the underachieving kids.
It begins to feel as if the classroom is meant to teach the bottom/middle of he class and the smart/higher-achievers are on their own. And, please don't suggest all those kids simply jump to very expensive private schools. The public system exists to TEACH kids. To dumb down the curriculum and then (maybe) hope anyone expecting more will opt out is just wrong.

I've had a few years in MCPS, and I think that the idea is nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school do this? My DC isn't school-age yet, but I occasionally read threads about elementary level issues. Assuming this thread is accurate, why would schools want to hold kids back from challenging themselves?

This might be a naive question, sorry if so.

I'm not sure anyone here knows for sure. When I have asked the story I get from teachers and the principal is that the writing needs to be inline with the reading so the kids at the top might not be moving ahead in reading but they are working on their writing. I only partially buy that explanation because there are kids that can do the writing at a higher level. They are not being tested so its not an option for them. I would love my kid to be reading more challenging stuff so he could work on his vocabulary. So yes, we do read at home instead. There is definitely a concentration on the kids at bottom. Not sure I completely buy the rumors that this is part of a big plan to cover up the achievement gap, but I entertain the idea that it is possible.

I think it just has to be this way.

For better or worse, public school has to teach certain basic skills to as many kids as possible. If your kid has already met those standards, they're doing well and don't really 'need' as much attention.

Sure, it'd be great if we could challenge those kids, but that just doesn't seem to be happening. I hear it gets better in MS and HS, so we're really hoping that's true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Give yourself a few years in MCPS and you'll more than "entertain" the idea. I've seen my high - achieving kids stagnate in classes where no new concepts are introduced (math) and where the good readers sit quietly and so worksheets while the teachers teach the underachieving kids.
It begins to feel as if the classroom is meant to teach the bottom/middle of he class and the smart/higher-achievers are on their own. And, please don't suggest all those kids simply jump to very expensive private schools. The public system exists to TEACH kids. To dumb down the curriculum and then (maybe) hope anyone expecting more will opt out is just wrong.

I've had a few years in MCPS, and I think that the idea is nonsense.

If you child just happens to be in the middle, then lucky you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would a school do this? My DC isn't school-age yet, but I occasionally read threads about elementary level issues. Assuming this thread is accurate, why would schools want to hold kids back from challenging themselves?

This might be a naive question, sorry if so.

I'm not sure anyone here knows for sure. When I have asked the story I get from teachers and the principal is that the writing needs to be inline with the reading so the kids at the top might not be moving ahead in reading but they are working on their writing. I only partially buy that explanation because there are kids that can do the writing at a higher level. They are not being tested so its not an option for them. I would love my kid to be reading more challenging stuff so he could work on his vocabulary. So yes, we do read at home instead. There is definitely a concentration on the kids at bottom. Not sure I completely buy the rumors that this is part of a big plan to cover up the achievement gap, but I entertain the idea that it is possible.

I think it just has to be this way.

For better or worse, public school has to teach certain basic skills to as many kids as possible. If your kid has already met those standards, they're doing well and don't really 'need' as much attention.

Sure, it'd be great if we could challenge those kids, but that just doesn't seem to be happening. I hear it gets better in MS and HS, so we're really hoping that's true.

1. They can put the kids in classes according to their reading level. Give lower ratios to the kids at the bottom and higher ratios to kids at the top. That would mean more class learning and less breaking up in groups with "busy time."