Benchmark reading assessments

[Anonymous]

It just seems weird getting C’s in 3rd grade..

[Anonymous]

Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

This is not helpful to OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

This is not helpful to OP.

Maybe this will?

Benchmark is nonsensical. It’s really hard for anyone to do well on those tests. It’s a really bad curriculum, not your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

This is not helpful to OP.

Maybe this will?

Benchmark is nonsensical. It’s really hard for anyone to do well on those tests. It’s a really bad curriculum, not your kid.

I have seen the tests. They are not nonsensical at all. Many kids do really well on these tests. My own DC sometimes does pretty well, but he is inconsistent for some reason

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

That's not even offered at our school. Parents are on their own to educate their children basically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

Have to give you a 10 for victim shaming.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

Thank you for the bluntness! I am aware its not benchmark. I am concerned about my DC’s inconsistent performance and I know its not ADHD or anything like that. Without turning him into an anxious kid who is worried about grades and getting C’s, how do I help?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

It is the curriculum. It was not recommended by the group that assessed curricula for MCPS, and it’s not recommended by Ed Reports. They should never have selected it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Benchmark is ridiculous.

They opted for a subpar, super boring curriculum because it was also available in Spanish.

They opted for it against the recommendation of the workgroup convened to review all the options at the time.

Everyone should be demanding they abandon it. The kids participating in the William & Mary cohort are essentially receiving the instruction that all kids should receive (not just advanced kids).

That's not even offered at our school. Parents are on their own to educate their children basically.

Same here. ELC not offered at our school. And even if it were, the kids who are at or below grade level wouldn’t benefit. MCOS needs to ditch Benchmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

It is the curriculum. It was not recommended by the group that assessed curricula for MCPS, and it’s not recommended by Ed Reports. They should never have selected it.

Why? What is wrong with benchmark?

[Anonymous]

This is the Ed Reports review of Benchmark: looks like it only partially meets expectations for grades K-5. https://edreports-206618.appspot.com/reports/overview/benchmark-advance-2021

I don’t like it because Benchmark is on-grade level so makes it especially difficult out for teachers to differentiate. Consider Eureka - it has problem sets that include relatively easy, medium, and hard problems to help teachers provide appropriate instruction to all learners. Benchmark does not do that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the Ed Reports review of Benchmark: looks like it only partially meets expectations for grades K-5. https://edreports-206618.appspot.com/reports/overview/benchmark-advance-2021

I don’t like it because Benchmark is on-grade level so makes it especially difficult out for teachers to differentiate. Consider Eureka - it has problem sets that include relatively easy, medium, and hard problems to help teachers provide appropriate instruction to all learners. Benchmark does not do that.

If its grade level, then everyone should do well on it so why some posters think that the tests are hard and nobody does well on them?