Is the math grouping really fluid in MCPS elementary schools?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| We are new to MCPS and while my child had exposure to some concepts above grade level, there are others that her previous school didn't cover. On back to school night they mentioned how it's fluid and kids are reassessed etc. But as I look at the curriculum (not in the integrated curriculum) is it realistic that if your child starts on grade level that they cover enough material to finish grade level and be moved to above grade level during the school year? Unless I'm missing something, how would it be structured that your kids covers all the on grade and say unit 1 above grade in order to be moved up for unit 2 or 3? Or is it more likely if you have outside enrichment or tutoring that it could happen during the school year, otherwise it is more likely to happen from one school year to the next if your child shows a strong track record? |
Anonymous
| When they do assessments, kids are testing on their current material as well as the same concept at the next level. If a child is consistently scoring well on the above grade level material may then be moved up during the year. Much depends on the school and the teacher involved. Because of the spiral approach (which means you cover the same concepts multiple times with increasing levels of diffuculty) kids often skip a year whihc is controversial. They do not accelerate the year to complete it all faster. The child just skips and hopefully gets enough to be successful. |
Anonymous
|
In our school, where parents really, really push for kids to be "above grade level," I haven't seen kids moved up mid-year. The pushing parent succeeds at the beginning of the year, occasionally, to move the kid into "higher" math, but it is rare after that. Sometimes, kids are moved down but not up.
It makes sense in many ways. After all, by moving mid-year, you would be skipping over basic skills and certain concepts to move to the higher class. What is the point of that? I think this type of concept-skipping is what caused the county to pull back on acceleration in general. Too many kids were missing the basics. |
Anonymous
| All children in "Advanced Math" have skipped. Thse children get to Math 6 or 7 by 5th grade. I you look at that pathways spreadsheet there are opportunities to skip most years.. |
Anonymous
|
Our experience is that math is fluid, but the changes usually happen at the beginning of each year.
For example, one year in our school there was a 3rd grade math, a 3/4 math, a 4th grade math (for 3rd graders only) and a 5th grade math (for 3rd graders only). In this example, all kids were assigned to the math track in the beginning of the year. Within the first month, a few kids might get moved when assessment data shows that the assignment might have been wrong for them (mostly moved up, not down). Then, they generally stay there for the year. At the end of the year there will be some in the 3/4 class who did very well on both the 3 & 4 components and will "skip" to 5th grade math the next year. For these kids the 4th grade parts acted like "acceleration." Other students may not have done so well on the 4th grade assessment parts, and so they will go to regular 4th grade math the next year or a 4/5 combo. For these kids the 3/4 combo acted more like 3rd w/ 4th grade "enrichment." My child entered MCPS in 3rd grade, did a 3/4 combo that year, "skipped" to 5/6th grade math in 4th grade, and then "skipped" again to 7th grade math in 5th grade. She will remain on the 2 years above track for the rest of her MS and HS career, because she lacks the interest in math to do further acceleration. So there is some fluidity in the math tracks. There is fluidity within the year in the combo classes when a child works more or less on the year-above components in the class. There is fluidity between years, when a child "skips" a year. There used to be a math paths brochure that MCPS gave out that explained the typical skipping points on the math pathways. It's useful to look at. |
Anonymous
| What grade is your child in? Students in K-1 and most schools grade 2 are not assessed using the old assessments any longer. Math grouping is fluid because small groups are different each day based on the content and where each student is with that particular skill or content. |
Anonymous
| How does the teacher assess that on a daily basis? I have long heard that from MCPS but it doesn't seem to be reality. |
Anonymous
| Op here. Thanks 9:57, it makes a lot of sense that it would work the way you described it. My DD is in 2nd grade at a school that opted not to do Curriculum 2.0 this year for 2nd grade so the math grouping are exactly like 9:57 described. I have another child in K doing the new curriculum. It will be interesting to see how their math education may differ. |
Anonymous
| Well either way, by the time your DD is in upper grades (definitely by 5th, probably 4th), she will be working under Curriculum 2.0 so the math groupings for entire classes/massive acceleration will not be an issue. As far as how teachers assess every day, I should clarify what I mean by assessment. I take anecdotal notes as I am teaching my whole group lesson and supervising students in guided practice. I use exit cards or some other type of quick assessment at the end of my lesson to see how many students have got the concept, "sort of" got the concept, or do not have the concept. I use that information to tell me who to pull with whom the following day. |
Anonymous
Thanks for the description. Do you find with the new curriculum and increased class sizes that teachers have a greater burden (assessing and accounting for possibly 3-4 groups of differing abilities as opposed to just teaching one level under the old system)? |