Any rumors on new curriculum vendor finalists?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

Wasn’t Strindberg on the curriculum review for Hopkins? He was a former MCPS principal (and he was in a higher position, I believe).

If I’m right, wasn’t that a conflict of interest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

Wasn’t Strindberg on the curriculum review for Hopkins? He was a former MCPS principal (and he was in a higher position, I believe).

If I’m right, wasn’t that a conflict of interest?

Steinberg
Damn phone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

Wasn’t Strindberg on the curriculum review for Hopkins? He was a former MCPS principal (and he was in a higher position, I believe).

If I’m right, wasn’t that a conflict of interest?

Steinberg
Damn phone

Who is he?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

Wasn’t Strindberg on the curriculum review for Hopkins? He was a former MCPS principal (and he was in a higher position, I believe).

If I’m right, wasn’t that a conflict of interest?

Steinberg
Damn phone

Who is he?

I thought he was on the curriculum report, which destroyed 2.0. But I can't find the report.

He was in MCPS in various roles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are any of these ones that Hopkins recommended?

I don't think Hopkins recommended specific curriculum vendors.

Let's hope someone expert without any conflicts of interest is on the panel...

Wasn’t Strindberg on the curriculum review for Hopkins? He was a former MCPS principal (and he was in a higher position, I believe).

If I’m right, wasn’t that a conflict of interest?

Steinberg
Damn phone

Who is he?

I thought he was on the curriculum report, which destroyed 2.0. But I can't find the report.

He was in MCPS in various roles.

Here is the executive summary.
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/curriculum/integrated/ExecutiveSummaryMCPS.PDF

[Anonymous]

It says Dr. David Steiner not steinberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It says Dr. David Steiner not steinberg.

And I don't think he's former MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Here is an email posted to a parent list serve. The parent is a public school curriculum professional. Based on her feedback, 4 of 5 programs are terrible for literacy but all are good for math.

Here is my recommendation on what to do about the curriculum selection.

I have about 100 opinions and have done a ton of research on these (and already know a bunch of them from my day job). Not sure how interested/involved you want to be but figured I'd share my two cents. For middle school it isn't quite as horrible. But 2/3 of the elementary choices are bad and one is mediocre, so if you are inclined to say/do anything, I'd suggest you click on the links for feedback put negative responses on the rating scale (literally three clicks).

Also, for the record, the math choices are all strong, so we have that going for us!

So, if you have five minutes, here's what I would do (before Dec. 9!). Click to provide feedback on "Wonders" and put in negative ratings (the open ended responses are optional, but you could add, if you want, "Ed Reports does not rate Wonders all green." I'd also likely put in mediocre (middle rating) feedback on Benchmark, and higher feedback on ReadyGen (that's our best bet and it is only slightly above mediocre, honestly). Here is the page for feedback links for each program:
MCPS Curriculum Review – Vendor Presentations webpage.


To put this in perspective, I think the program called "Wonders" they have listed here is on par with what I see in some of the lowest performing, weakest districts in the country; in fact, we'd be better in terms of curriculum sending our kids to Baltimore City Schools. Seriously their materials for reading and literacy are better and more rigorous. Some of these are actually programs I actively superintendents against using. Wonders is so low level and boring that I would seriously consider private school.

One of my main sources was an independent review consortium called Ed Reports (actually called out in the RFP from MoCo for curriculum). Both Wonders and Benchmark are not rated "all green" on their ratings. Just in case you wanted one of my back up sources! You can click here if you are so inclined.

Link for feedback https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/presentations.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is an email posted to a parent list serve. The parent is a public school curriculum professional. Based on her feedback, 4 of 5 programs are terrible for literacy but all are good for math.

Here is my recommendation on what to do about the curriculum selection.

I have about 100 opinions and have done a ton of research on these (and already know a bunch of them from my day job). Not sure how interested/involved you want to be but figured I'd share my two cents. For middle school it isn't quite as horrible. But 2/3 of the elementary choices are bad and one is mediocre, so if you are inclined to say/do anything, I'd suggest you click on the links for feedback put negative responses on the rating scale (literally three clicks).

Also, for the record, the math choices are all strong, so we have that going for us!

So, if you have five minutes, here's what I would do (before Dec. 9!). Click to provide feedback on "Wonders" and put in negative ratings (the open ended responses are optional, but you could add, if you want, "Ed Reports does not rate Wonders all green." I'd also likely put in mediocre (middle rating) feedback on Benchmark, and higher feedback on ReadyGen (that's our best bet and it is only slightly above mediocre, honestly). Here is the page for feedback links for each program:
MCPS Curriculum Review – Vendor Presentations webpage.


To put this in perspective, I think the program called "Wonders" they have listed here is on par with what I see in some of the lowest performing, weakest districts in the country; in fact, we'd be better in terms of curriculum sending our kids to Baltimore City Schools. Seriously their materials for reading and literacy are better and more rigorous. Some of these are actually programs I actively superintendents against using. Wonders is so low level and boring that I would seriously consider private school.

One of my main sources was an independent review consortium called Ed Reports (actually called out in the RFP from MoCo for curriculum). Both Wonders and Benchmark are not rated "all green" on their ratings. Just in case you wanted one of my back up sources! You can click here if you are so inclined.

Link for feedback https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/presentations.aspx

Thanks for posting this. I had not given feedback, but will do so after checking that website out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It says Dr. David Steiner not steinberg.

And I don't think he's former MCPS.

Yup

You're right! Steinberg was former MCPS . . .

thanks!

[Anonymous]

So I went back to check the vendor finalist presentations because DH was asking about the choices. MCPS deleted the page, I suppose because the survey period is over?

Why would they do that? We aren't allowed to have the options there as a resource?

So weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is an email posted to a parent list serve. The parent is a public school curriculum professional. Based on her feedback, 4 of 5 programs are terrible for literacy but all are good for math.

Here is my recommendation on what to do about the curriculum selection.

I have about 100 opinions and have done a ton of research on these (and already know a bunch of them from my day job). Not sure how interested/involved you want to be but figured I'd share my two cents. For middle school it isn't quite as horrible. But 2/3 of the elementary choices are bad and one is mediocre, so if you are inclined to say/do anything, I'd suggest you click on the links for feedback put negative responses on the rating scale (literally three clicks).

Also, for the record, the math choices are all strong, so we have that going for us!

So, if you have five minutes, here's what I would do (before Dec. 9!). Click to provide feedback on "Wonders" and put in negative ratings (the open ended responses are optional, but you could add, if you want, "Ed Reports does not rate Wonders all green." I'd also likely put in mediocre (middle rating) feedback on Benchmark, and higher feedback on ReadyGen (that's our best bet and it is only slightly above mediocre, honestly). Here is the page for feedback links for each program:
MCPS Curriculum Review – Vendor Presentations webpage.


To put this in perspective, I think the program called "Wonders" they have listed here is on par with what I see in some of the lowest performing, weakest districts in the country; in fact, we'd be better in terms of curriculum sending our kids to Baltimore City Schools. Seriously their materials for reading and literacy are better and more rigorous. Some of these are actually programs I actively superintendents against using. Wonders is so low level and boring that I would seriously consider private school.

One of my main sources was an independent review consortium called Ed Reports (actually called out in the RFP from MoCo for curriculum). Both Wonders and Benchmark are not rated "all green" on their ratings. Just in case you wanted one of my back up sources! You can click here if you are so inclined.

Link for feedback https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/presentations.aspx

Thanks for posting this. I had not given feedback, but will do so after checking that website out.

+1 The feedback on the ELA curricula is really disturbing. Why would MCPS shortlist so many programs that are weak (particularly if Wonders isn't even considered adequate)?

[Anonymous]

The feedback link isn't even working anymore. I can't find the list of finalists anywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I went back to check the vendor finalist presentations because DH was asking about the choices. MCPS deleted the page, I suppose because the survey period is over?

Why would they do that? We aren't allowed to have the options there as a resource?

So weird.

Their letter said the presentations would be available through Dec. 9th. There is still a feedback form available on this page:
https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/curriculum-review.aspx