Is MCPS positioning to shut down the GT/magnet programs?

[Anonymous]

Curriculum 2.0 failed and the audit showed that this failure had a disproportionate impact on lowering performing students

Typo - lower performing not lowering performing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What percentage of MoCo students attends magnets?

Here is a report for you to read: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/info/choice/ChoiceStudyReport-Version2-20160307.pdf

Thanks! So we're talking about 442 students per grade on average who are admitted to what used to be known as a highly gifted centers. And there are about 13,000 kids per grade. So the top 3% or so goes to magnets, and everyone else makes do with standard MCPS. Yup, I prefer the Fairfax model.

Top 3% are very special kids with unique needs.

I have a CES kid and I think she's special, but she's not some supergenius who couldn't possible have functioned in anything but a self-contained classroom. Just bright, hard-working, and creative. Ditto the vast majority of her peers in that class. Of the kids I know well in that class (about 15), only one appears to be highly gifted in the "clinical" sense. The rest are like my daughter. More creative than other kids, but not doing high-level physics in 4th grade or anything.

+1 There has to be an arbitrary cutoff point. But reasonable people could conclude that 3% is less inclusive than it needs to be and that 10% could function just fine without a substantial dumbing down of the curriculum.

How about differentiated classes across the board? Shouldn't every kid work at their level?
A lot of this has to do with school rating isn't based on high achievers but eliminating low achievers.
Most kids in early elementary near the top get ignored because they're not at risk and won't negatively impact the school's rating.

If MCPS goes back to Tracking, the progress of the past decade will indeed be gone.

Please tell us the progtess MCPS made in the past decade.
I haved lived in MC for decades and observed tgat:
MCPS’s PARCC scores are below Howard, Frederick and other 4 counties in Maryland this year.
The achievement gap persists and enlarges year after year.
Classroom size gets larger and larger.
......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What percentage of MoCo students attends magnets?

Here is a report for you to read: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/uploadedFiles/info/choice/ChoiceStudyReport-Version2-20160307.pdf

Thanks! So we're talking about 442 students per grade on average who are admitted to what used to be known as a highly gifted centers. And there are about 13,000 kids per grade. So the top 3% or so goes to magnets, and everyone else makes do with standard MCPS. Yup, I prefer the Fairfax model.

Top 3% are very special kids with unique needs.

I have a CES kid and I think she's special, but she's not some supergenius who couldn't possible have functioned in anything but a self-contained classroom. Just bright, hard-working, and creative. Ditto the vast majority of her peers in that class. Of the kids I know well in that class (about 15), only one appears to be highly gifted in the "clinical" sense. The rest are like my daughter. More creative than other kids, but not doing high-level physics in 4th grade or anything.

+1 There has to be an arbitrary cutoff point. But reasonable people could conclude that 3% is less inclusive than it needs to be and that 10% could function just fine without a substantial dumbing down of the curriculum.

How about differentiated classes across the board? Shouldn't every kid work at their level?
A lot of this has to do with school rating isn't based on high achievers but eliminating low achievers.
Most kids in early elementary near the top get ignored because they're not at risk and won't negatively impact the school's rating.

If MCPS goes back to Tracking, the progress of the past decade will indeed be gone.

Please tell us the progtess MCPS made in the past decade.
I haved lived in MC for decades and observed tgat:
MCPS’s PARCC scores are below Howard, Frederick and other 4 counties in Maryland this year.
The achievement gap persists and enlarges year after year.
Classroom size gets larger and larger.
......

NP
MCPS leads the state in Math and science
MCPS leads in AP test scores

Most MCPS students do not take PARCC seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If MCPS goes back to Tracking, the progress of the past decade will indeed be gone.

Unfortunately (and I mean that sincerely) you can not show any improvement over the past decade. There has only been decline. MCPS has gone from being #1 in the state to being #9.

Curriculum 2.0 failed and the audit showed that this failure had a disproportionate impact on lowering performing students. In addition by dumbing down the curriculum and doing such a poor job, MCPS pushed more UMC families toward supplementing outside of school creating an even deeper performance gap.

MCPS was counting on improved Algebra exam scores after 2.0 rolled out. The first year of failures they blamed the old curriculum. When the failure rates rose even higher the following year, they pressured the board to just remove the exams.

Tracking is alive and never went away at least in the DCC. The parents there demand differentiation because there is such a hug gap between students being several years below grade level and students being at or above grade level.

Although the differentiated classes in DCC schools exceeds what is available elsewhere in the county, it's still C2.0 just accelerated by a couple years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Please tell us the progtess MCPS made in the past decade.
I haved lived in MC for decades and observed tgat:
MCPS’s PARCC scores are below Howard, Frederick and other 4 counties in Maryland this year.
The achievement gap persists and enlarges year after year.
Classroom size gets larger and larger.
......

No, it doesn't. That is factually incorrect. I

t is human nature to believe that everything is always getting worse, even when the facts show otherwise.