MCPS: New ELA curriculum for 2023-2024 school year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has made it clear that they now want to make sure it goes with their equity lens. They do not care if it teaches reading as long as the main focus of the program is equity.

My guess is that when the final programs were reviewed, the focus was on literacy instruction and how well they did in the classroom (which makes sense). Hence, they need to review all again and add in others with a new focus lens.

This of course costs more time and money. I wish I was joking.

So basically you need to teach your kid phonics and reading at home if you want them to learn anything.

The decision-makers at the Central Office are so far removed from students that it hasn't been about education for a long time now. If this continues, MCPS will be reduced to a jobs program that serves no function aside from promoting equality for its own sake and parents will become increasingly irate.

There´s nothing wrong with using an equity lens, but delaying the correction of a poor curriculum will actually exacerbate inequality.

I will push back on this... yes, there is something wrong with using an equity lens. Our country is based on the idea that the government treats each citizen equally. Does it fail to do this sometimes? Sure, but that is the premise. I can't get behind taking a system that left some kids behind to creating a new system that leaves different kids behind.

Equity is not about leaving anyone behind. It’s about provide the supports that each person needs in order to be able to achieve their highest potential.

Of course it is not designed to leave others behind, but that's what it has done in practice during the last ten years in MCPS. Designing policies, dedicating resources and choosing curricula designed for the lowest achievers leaves behind both average and above average students. If you are serious about providing the supports that each person needs to reach their highest potential, we would all support that. But that would involve radically different policies than those that have been adopted, including tracking, use of magnet curricula in all schools, separate classes for English Language Learners, a required "Pre-K" year for kids who arrive not knowing how to hold a book, disciplinary policies that allow kids to learn, etc. Somehow, I doubt that is what you mean.

I don’t disagree with all you said just some of it. You don’t need tracking to provide equity, because kids should be allowed to live up and down a level based on skill, ability, and will to succeed. The kindergarten evaluation should definitely determine whether kids are at the Pre-K level or K and then kids be placed accordingly. If they catch on quickly they can move into K. We should absolutely stop pretending that one teacher can be all things to all learners when there are 20+ learners in the class, particularly at the ES level. All those classes need a full-time Para or Assistant teacher. ELL should definitely be separate with push-in to regular classes for things like recess/specials/etc. Ot should also be understood that these kids need after school enrichment in order to get then up to speed in the language quickly.

I would greatly support reimagining education in ways that actually supported equity.

It's always fascinating to see how people who have never stepped foot in a classroom think they know how to run a school.


Wouldn't children who don't speak a lick of English really benefit from peers who model speaking English?

What happens to a classroom if you are just constantly having kids test out of preschool, would that make sense for the ELL "preschool" teacher to start the year with 20 kids, and the general education kindergarten teacher starts with 20 but then over time funneling kids over to the general Ed kindergarten teacher so teacher A has 5 kids and teacher b has 35

So what happens when you have kids who are newcomers who are not in kindergarten does this hypothetical preschool class also have 10 year olds in it or do they get to be learning with their same age peers?

Sure kids benefit from immersion with native speakers. But they also benefit from quality direct instruction that will help them get up to speed quicker. And there is a difference in having one non-native speaker in a class vs having several and then also having 15+ other students with a range of abilities that speak the language (and some of them not all that great). No one is advocating for isolating a kid they are advocating for giving the tools and the best chance of success.

If you have a 10yr old join who was a A student in their language but then drop them in a class they don’t understand the language are you still expecting them to be an A student? Or would it be better to continue teaching them in their language in their level while also providing them intense instruction and opportunity to engage in the new language so they get up to speed quickly?

So what you are proposing is that mcps hire fully bilingual teachers in who can speak half a dozen of different languages to individually tutor newcomers until the student is bilingual "enough" (is there a wida cut score?) To participate in a general education classroom.

NP - Nope... I don't support individual tutors. I support special schools or classrooms where learning English is the goal (along with proper behavior in school and as much background information as possible). You can divide classes by language of origin, or you can just teach English without speaking the language of the children. My grandparents taught English in a refugee camp with kids from multiple Asian countries. You hold up an apple, teach the word "apple," taste the apple, etc. It works. The time spent in "English School" will pay off larger benefits, even if the kids are not focused on math, science, etc. during that year. And yes, there should be a minimum level of English proficiency to participate in a mainstream classroom. If diplomats don't want their kids in this type of classroom, they can pay for private school.

I thhink it would do the kids a massive disservice to not get math or science or anything else for several years. And let's not pretend that kids aren't learning language when they are learning math and science and other subjects there is important vocabulary and conventions of English learned through all domains.

I don't even know why I would want to take someone seriously if they think the most rigorous education you could give to an English language learner is to show them a bunch of flashcards. What a bullshit colonialist fantasy

[Anonymous]

Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has made it clear that they now want to make sure it goes with their equity lens. They do not care if it teaches reading as long as the main focus of the program is equity.

My guess is that when the final programs were reviewed, the focus was on literacy instruction and how well they did in the classroom (which makes sense). Hence, they need to review all again and add in others with a new focus lens.

This of course costs more time and money. I wish I was joking.

So basically you need to teach your kid phonics and reading at home if you want them to learn anything.

The decision-makers at the Central Office are so far removed from students that it hasn't been about education for a long time now. If this continues, MCPS will be reduced to a jobs program that serves no function aside from promoting equality for its own sake and parents will become increasingly irate.

There´s nothing wrong with using an equity lens, but delaying the correction of a poor curriculum will actually exacerbate inequality.

I will push back on this... yes, there is something wrong with using an equity lens. Our country is based on the idea that the government treats each citizen equally. Does it fail to do this sometimes? Sure, but that is the premise. I can't get behind taking a system that left some kids behind to creating a new system that leaves different kids behind.

Equity is not about leaving anyone behind. It’s about provide the supports that each person needs in order to be able to achieve their highest potential.

Of course it is not designed to leave others behind, but that's what it has done in practice during the last ten years in MCPS. Designing policies, dedicating resources and choosing curricula designed for the lowest achievers leaves behind both average and above average students. If you are serious about providing the supports that each person needs to reach their highest potential, we would all support that. But that would involve radically different policies than those that have been adopted, including tracking, use of magnet curricula in all schools, separate classes for English Language Learners, a required "Pre-K" year for kids who arrive not knowing how to hold a book, disciplinary policies that allow kids to learn, etc. Somehow, I doubt that is what you mean.

I don’t disagree with all you said just some of it. You don’t need tracking to provide equity, because kids should be allowed to live up and down a level based on skill, ability, and will to succeed. The kindergarten evaluation should definitely determine whether kids are at the Pre-K level or K and then kids be placed accordingly. If they catch on quickly they can move into K. We should absolutely stop pretending that one teacher can be all things to all learners when there are 20+ learners in the class, particularly at the ES level. All those classes need a full-time Para or Assistant teacher. ELL should definitely be separate with push-in to regular classes for things like recess/specials/etc. Ot should also be understood that these kids need after school enrichment in order to get then up to speed in the language quickly.

I would greatly support reimagining education in ways that actually supported equity.

It's always fascinating to see how people who have never stepped foot in a classroom think they know how to run a school.


Wouldn't children who don't speak a lick of English really benefit from peers who model speaking English?

What happens to a classroom if you are just constantly having kids test out of preschool, would that make sense for the ELL "preschool" teacher to start the year with 20 kids, and the general education kindergarten teacher starts with 20 but then over time funneling kids over to the general Ed kindergarten teacher so teacher A has 5 kids and teacher b has 35

So what happens when you have kids who are newcomers who are not in kindergarten does this hypothetical preschool class also have 10 year olds in it or do they get to be learning with their same age peers?

Sure kids benefit from immersion with native speakers. But they also benefit from quality direct instruction that will help them get up to speed quicker. And there is a difference in having one non-native speaker in a class vs having several and then also having 15+ other students with a range of abilities that speak the language (and some of them not all that great). No one is advocating for isolating a kid they are advocating for giving the tools and the best chance of success.

If you have a 10yr old join who was a A student in their language but then drop them in a class they don’t understand the language are you still expecting them to be an A student? Or would it be better to continue teaching them in their language in their level while also providing them intense instruction and opportunity to engage in the new language so they get up to speed quickly?

So what you are proposing is that mcps hire fully bilingual teachers in who can speak half a dozen of different languages to individually tutor newcomers until the student is bilingual "enough" (is there a wida cut score?) To participate in a general education classroom.

NP - Nope... I don't support individual tutors. I support special schools or classrooms where learning English is the goal (along with proper behavior in school and as much background information as possible). You can divide classes by language of origin, or you can just teach English without speaking the language of the children. My grandparents taught English in a refugee camp with kids from multiple Asian countries. You hold up an apple, teach the word "apple," taste the apple, etc. It works. The time spent in "English School" will pay off larger benefits, even if the kids are not focused on math, science, etc. during that year. And yes, there should be a minimum level of English proficiency to participate in a mainstream classroom. If diplomats don't want their kids in this type of classroom, they can pay for private school.

I thhink it would do the kids a massive disservice to not get math or science or anything else for several years. And let's not pretend that kids aren't learning language when they are learning math and science and other subjects there is important vocabulary and conventions of English learned through all domains.

I don't even know why I would want to take someone seriously if they think the most rigorous education you could give to an English language learner is to show them a bunch of flashcards. What a bullshit colonialist fantasy

You apparently didn't read the post, which doesn't mention flash cards, or multiple years outside a regular classroom. But again, you have a unique vision of what the vast majority of "English Language Learners" are like right now. They are not arriving literate in their language and ready and able to absorb information on Newton's Laws or Geometry in their language. We are talking about kids who do not have really basic background information, and that lack of content knowledge will both delay their development in English and all of the other subjects. They never get to stop and catch up, as we expect them to maintain progress in topics for which they have no foundation AND learn the language at the same time. In reality, they don't really do either well, but we graduate them all the same. The BS colonialist fantasy is that we can take in millions of uneducated people and expect them to not be poor and to send their kids to college in a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS has made it clear that they now want to make sure it goes with their equity lens. They do not care if it teaches reading as long as the main focus of the program is equity.

My guess is that when the final programs were reviewed, the focus was on literacy instruction and how well they did in the classroom (which makes sense). Hence, they need to review all again and add in others with a new focus lens.

This of course costs more time and money. I wish I was joking.

So basically you need to teach your kid phonics and reading at home if you want them to learn anything.

The decision-makers at the Central Office are so far removed from students that it hasn't been about education for a long time now. If this continues, MCPS will be reduced to a jobs program that serves no function aside from promoting equality for its own sake and parents will become increasingly irate.

There´s nothing wrong with using an equity lens, but delaying the correction of a poor curriculum will actually exacerbate inequality.

I will push back on this... yes, there is something wrong with using an equity lens. Our country is based on the idea that the government treats each citizen equally. Does it fail to do this sometimes? Sure, but that is the premise. I can't get behind taking a system that left some kids behind to creating a new system that leaves different kids behind.

Equity is not about leaving anyone behind. It’s about provide the supports that each person needs in order to be able to achieve their highest potential.

Of course it is not designed to leave others behind, but that's what it has done in practice during the last ten years in MCPS. Designing policies, dedicating resources and choosing curricula designed for the lowest achievers leaves behind both average and above average students. If you are serious about providing the supports that each person needs to reach their highest potential, we would all support that. But that would involve radically different policies than those that have been adopted, including tracking, use of magnet curricula in all schools, separate classes for English Language Learners, a required "Pre-K" year for kids who arrive not knowing how to hold a book, disciplinary policies that allow kids to learn, etc. Somehow, I doubt that is what you mean.

I don’t disagree with all you said just some of it. You don’t need tracking to provide equity, because kids should be allowed to live up and down a level based on skill, ability, and will to succeed. The kindergarten evaluation should definitely determine whether kids are at the Pre-K level or K and then kids be placed accordingly. If they catch on quickly they can move into K. We should absolutely stop pretending that one teacher can be all things to all learners when there are 20+ learners in the class, particularly at the ES level. All those classes need a full-time Para or Assistant teacher. ELL should definitely be separate with push-in to regular classes for things like recess/specials/etc. Ot should also be understood that these kids need after school enrichment in order to get then up to speed in the language quickly.

I would greatly support reimagining education in ways that actually supported equity.

It's always fascinating to see how people who have never stepped foot in a classroom think they know how to run a school.


Wouldn't children who don't speak a lick of English really benefit from peers who model speaking English?

What happens to a classroom if you are just constantly having kids test out of preschool, would that make sense for the ELL "preschool" teacher to start the year with 20 kids, and the general education kindergarten teacher starts with 20 but then over time funneling kids over to the general Ed kindergarten teacher so teacher A has 5 kids and teacher b has 35

So what happens when you have kids who are newcomers who are not in kindergarten does this hypothetical preschool class also have 10 year olds in it or do they get to be learning with their same age peers?

Sure kids benefit from immersion with native speakers. But they also benefit from quality direct instruction that will help them get up to speed quicker. And there is a difference in having one non-native speaker in a class vs having several and then also having 15+ other students with a range of abilities that speak the language (and some of them not all that great). No one is advocating for isolating a kid they are advocating for giving the tools and the best chance of success.

If you have a 10yr old join who was a A student in their language but then drop them in a class they don’t understand the language are you still expecting them to be an A student? Or would it be better to continue teaching them in their language in their level while also providing them intense instruction and opportunity to engage in the new language so they get up to speed quickly?

So what you are proposing is that mcps hire fully bilingual teachers in who can speak half a dozen of different languages to individually tutor newcomers until the student is bilingual "enough" (is there a wida cut score?) To participate in a general education classroom.

NP - Nope... I don't support individual tutors. I support special schools or classrooms where learning English is the goal (along with proper behavior in school and as much background information as possible). You can divide classes by language of origin, or you can just teach English without speaking the language of the children. My grandparents taught English in a refugee camp with kids from multiple Asian countries. You hold up an apple, teach the word "apple," taste the apple, etc. It works. The time spent in "English School" will pay off larger benefits, even if the kids are not focused on math, science, etc. during that year. And yes, there should be a minimum level of English proficiency to participate in a mainstream classroom. If diplomats don't want their kids in this type of classroom, they can pay for private school.

I thhink it would do the kids a massive disservice to not get math or science or anything else for several years. And let's not pretend that kids aren't learning language when they are learning math and science and other subjects there is important vocabulary and conventions of English learned through all domains.

I don't even know why I would want to take someone seriously if they think the most rigorous education you could give to an English language learner is to show them a bunch of flashcards. What a bullshit colonialist fantasy

You apparently didn't read the post, which doesn't mention flash cards, or multiple years outside a regular classroom. But again, you have a unique vision of what the vast majority of "English Language Learners" are like right now. They are not arriving literate in their language and ready and able to absorb information on Newton's Laws or Geometry in their language. We are talking about kids who do not have really basic background information, and that lack of content knowledge will both delay their development in English and all of the other subjects. They never get to stop and catch up, as we expect them to maintain progress in topics for which they have no foundation AND learn the language at the same time. In reality, they don't really do either well, but we graduate them all the same. The BS colonialist fantasy is that we can take in millions of uneducated people and expect them to not be poor and to send their kids to college in a few years.

"colonialist fantasy"? huh? But immigrants almost always work their asses off even if their kids struggle. Their grandkids tend to assimilate nicely, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

This post is from last year. Are you just trying to stir up trouble?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

This post is from last year. Are you just trying to stir up trouble?

well, it is DCUM after all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

This post is from last year. Are you just trying to stir up trouble?

NP here - has a new curriculum been selected yet? If not, PP can hardly be accused of stirring up trouble.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

This post is from last year. Are you just trying to stir up trouble?

What are you talking about? The post replied to was from 7/15 of this year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has MCPS announced that they are re-bidding the RFP? Or are they just planning to keep Benchmark? This is so disappointing.

Doubtful. MCPS can't even be bothered to update the timeline, which says that a new curriculum will be selected in March 2023: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BwcYJE5n-ttBvt2JKNbya82ZRaeXL_1SICK_ZrjmTE4/edit

This post is from last year. Are you just trying to stir up trouble?

Stir up trouble?

Wanting the schools to provide a quality reading program is one of the more important things parents can be advocating for.

My child's Benchmark consumable "book" has a one pager on Robert's Rules of Order-- is that how you imagine 8 year olds should be taught to love and excel at reading??