Looks like ELC is gone

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

+1 The "point" of ELC was the cohorting. They took the introduction of CKLA to quietly get rid of the part of ELC that worked.

[Anonymous]

Can folks whose kids have been through ELC share what you thought the most valuable parts of the curriculum/content were?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Sounds like the ELC teacher was mediocre.

[Anonymous]

It's not gone. They just have ELC for all now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not gone. They just have ELC for all now.

This is absolutely 100 percent not true. Why does someone keep writing this???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

+1 The "point" of ELC was the cohorting. They took the introduction of CKLA to quietly get rid of the part of ELC that worked.

I honestly can’t believe you are all blowing right past the emphasis on reading actual books. I would have thought that we could all agree that advanced readers being given the chance to read and discuss actual books was a good thing. Apparently not. Let’s just read excerpts on early American civilizations again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not gone. They just have ELC for all now.

This is absolutely 100 percent not true. Why does someone keep writing this???

Trolling is common on this website.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

I would call central office to discuss. WIN/FIT enrichment is supposed to be over and above enrichment offered in class, either in a cohorted class if there are enough students or in a regular class through reading groups (which is harder for the teacher but is the only option when you don’t have enough students to form a class).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

I would call central office to discuss. WIN/FIT enrichment is supposed to be over and above enrichment offered in class, either in a cohorted class if there are enough students or in a regular class through reading groups (which is harder for the teacher but is the only option when you don’t have enough students to form a class).

My 3rd grader was supposed to receive in class enrichment, as were a number of their friends. They had extra worksheets available to them, which DC did occasionally. That was it. I suspect any “in class” enrichment will be tha same, given that the accelerated curriculum for the 5th graders is implemented through moving quickly and not taking the “pause” days. I cannot see how that will work when the rest of the class is moving at the regular pace. Just ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

I would call central office to discuss. WIN/FIT enrichment is supposed to be over and above enrichment offered in class, either in a cohorted class if there are enough students or in a regular class through reading groups (which is harder for the teacher but is the only option when you don’t have enough students to form a class).

My 3rd grader was supposed to receive in class enrichment, as were a number of their friends. They had extra worksheets available to them, which DC did occasionally. That was it. I suspect any “in class” enrichment will be tha same, given that the accelerated curriculum for the 5th graders is implemented through moving quickly and not taking the “pause” days. I cannot see how that will work when the rest of the class is moving at the regular pace. Just ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

To be clear I'm talking about enrichment for 4th/5th graders. -PP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

I would call central office to discuss. WIN/FIT enrichment is supposed to be over and above enrichment offered in class, either in a cohorted class if there are enough students or in a regular class through reading groups (which is harder for the teacher but is the only option when you don’t have enough students to form a class).

My 3rd grader was supposed to receive in class enrichment, as were a number of their friends. They had extra worksheets available to them, which DC did occasionally. That was it. I suspect any “in class” enrichment will be tha same, given that the accelerated curriculum for the 5th graders is implemented through moving quickly and not taking the “pause” days. I cannot see how that will work when the rest of the class is moving at the regular pace. Just ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

To be clear I'm talking about enrichment for 4th/5th graders. -PP

Understood but I fail to see what is magic about going to 4th grade that will allow the teacher to provide meaningful acceleration to a handful of high achieving students while also trying ti remediate the children who are way behind at the same time. Has anyone here actually had their child receive meaningful in class enrichment while in a mixed cohort? I’m yet to meet a single person in real life.

Hopefully we all agree it would be bonkers to teach compacted math in a class with regular math also going on? Why don’t we acknowledge the same is true for literacy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the elimination of ELC came as a surprise to everyone, including the MCCPTA gifted committee, who had pushed very hard to get ELC rolled out in every single ES in the county.

I do think a new group of parents need to step up and start advocating on this issue. It wouldn't even be that hard because offering ELC should be cost neutral - you have the same number of teachers and students, you just cohort the highly able learners for reading in 4th and 5th grades.

I was one of the people who previously sent an email to our principal urging to roll out of ELC at our elementary school. I would like to ask the parents whose children have attended ELC for the past years: Has ELC truly been beneficial for gifted children who were not placed CES? While I'm uncertain about other aspects, the MAP-R test, which is a measurable data point, my child's score decreased after the 3rd grade spring test and did not improve throughout 4th and 5th grades. It only went back up in the final 5th grade spring test. So I wouldn't feel any regret even if my other younger child does not take ELC classes in the future. Furthermore, I have been satisfied with the CKLA curriculum I've seen so far, and the material for 4th and 5th grades appears sufficiently challenging. As long as they offer separate advanced level classes using CKLA, I'm fine with it.

Agre with this. It is the cohorting that matters. I actually don't think ELC material was great. MCPS came up with it on its own--we know they are not good curriculum writers. Using CKLA and moving at a faster pace to cover more content in a cohorted class sounds better to me.

But they aren't doing this. They're doing 30 minute "enrichment" time.

No - schools are told that if they have enough students to form a stand-alone class they are expected to do that. Now if I had a kid who was on the CES waitlist I absolutely would be meeting with my home school’s leadership to make sure that happens, because there is clearly a disconnect between what central office says and what schools do. But that is what central office is saying, and if you hear from schools that they are not doing that, then I would be in tough with the ES English team in central office and AEI to request that they work with your school.

Our school will have an advanced cohort for 5th grade next year because it was already set up from ELC this year. The 4th graders will NOT have an advanced cohort and will pretty much just get enrichment during WIN time. Our principal said that they think the county is moving away from the advanced cohort in general. Is that true? I have no idea but please don’t assume that advanced cohort will be there. I don’t understand this push aside from not having to deal with angry parents whose children didn’t get in. If you advocated against ELC without understanding that losing the cohort was a likely outcome you seriously shot yourself and your kid in the foot.

Our ELC experience was amazing. I don’t particularly care how it showed up in MAP scores, my kid was already reading so many years ahead I don’t really think anything was going to move the neethat much. I think a big strength of the ELC curriculum was in the writing and I don’t really wind that would show up in a standardized test. I think you very likely just had a bad teacher.

I would call central office to discuss. WIN/FIT enrichment is supposed to be over and above enrichment offered in class, either in a cohorted class if there are enough students or in a regular class through reading groups (which is harder for the teacher but is the only option when you don’t have enough students to form a class).

My 3rd grader was supposed to receive in class enrichment, as were a number of their friends. They had extra worksheets available to them, which DC did occasionally. That was it. I suspect any “in class” enrichment will be tha same, given that the accelerated curriculum for the 5th graders is implemented through moving quickly and not taking the “pause” days. I cannot see how that will work when the rest of the class is moving at the regular pace. Just ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

To be clear I'm talking about enrichment for 4th/5th graders. -PP

Understood but I fail to see what is magic about going to 4th grade that will allow the teacher to provide meaningful acceleration to a handful of high achieving students while also trying ti remediate the children who are way behind at the same time. Has anyone here actually had their child receive meaningful in class enrichment while in a mixed cohort? I’m yet to meet a single person in real life.

Hopefully we all agree it would be bonkers to teach compacted math in a class with regular math also going on? Why don’t we acknowledge the same is true for literacy?

I don’t disagree. That’s why central office is telling schools to cohort if they have the students to do so. But the expectation in 3rd is not the same as the expectation in 4th and 5th, where enrichment needs to happen outside of WIN time, not just in it.

And those of you in ES should be focusing on MS issues - the current English curriculum is bad, and the BOE chose not to vote on adopting CKLA in 6th-8th at the last BoE meeting. Everything you are describing is worse in MS because cohorting is not happening at all (all students are in the same “advanced” class) and the curriculum is much worse.

Your students will be in MS in a couple of years, and if you want this to change, you should start working on it now.