More evidence that 2.0 and Starr is backward looking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know everybody loves Finland. But Finland is likely Montgomery county taking out everyone who lives on the wrong side of the track. I am not sure any of their lessons are applicable. Also people keep saying they don't start school until 7. But they have universal preschool starts at 3.

Other than a few select pockets, Montgomery Co. in no way can be perceived as an area without diversity socioeconomically. This is a big reason for 2.0. The curriculum allows teachers to meet the kids where they are and relies on ability grouping, especially in language arts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Preschools in Finland and much of Europe are all play based. They do not teach letters or numbers until age 7, when children are developmentally ready to learn to read, and they learn quickly at that point. What distinguished Finland most is the social aspects of learning. Social development is a huge priority there, whereas here it is completely ignored. I just heard about a study showing that classrooms that emphasized social and emotional learning had fewer behavior problems and better academic learning. As far as math, I have heard that some high school teachers in MCPS and univ. profs say that MCPS pushes kids to be accelerated at the expense of developing a proper foundation in math. They get kids who think they are advanced, they've been pushed to get past calculus, bla bla bla, and in fact are unprepared and have major gaps. So acceleration may not be as great as some think it is.

Finland's model is a better way to go.The poor kindergartners are expected to do way too much here. As stated above, socialization is not an emphasis and it comes back to bite us pretty quickly. The big issue is that MCPS swung the pendulum so far in the direction of acceleration that it was causing major math issues in the long run, but now we are back to the other extreme where there is not enough acceleration. Unless, your child happens to have a particularly motivated teacher with a lot of time on her hands to develop the needed enrichment for the truly advanced kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Preschools in Finland and much of Europe are all play based. They do not teach letters or numbers until age 7, when children are developmentally ready to learn to read, and they learn quickly at that point. What distinguished Finland most is the social aspects of learning. Social development is a huge priority there, whereas here it is completely ignored. I just heard about a study showing that classrooms that emphasized social and emotional learning had fewer behavior problems and better academic learning. As far as math, I have heard that some high school teachers in MCPS and univ. profs say that MCPS pushes kids to be accelerated at the expense of developing a proper foundation in math. They get kids who think they are advanced, they've been pushed to get past calculus, bla bla bla, and in fact are unprepared and have major gaps. So acceleration may not be as great as some think it is.

Which Asians are too accelerated and advanced in math with lots of gaps?

This is a ridiculously racist remark. Uh, Asians aren't born to be pushed 2 grade levels above in Math. Pushing too hard glosses over concepts and they are not fully understood. Later, when students are expected to build upon previous knowledge, that knowledge is full of holes... Asian or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know everybody loves Finland. But Finland is likely Montgomery county taking out everyone who lives on the wrong side of the track. I am not sure any of their lessons are applicable. Also people keep saying they don't start school until 7. But they have universal preschool starts at 3.

Other than a few select pockets, Montgomery Co. in no way can be perceived as an area without diversity socioeconomically. This is a big reason for 2.0. The curriculum allows teachers to meet the kids where they are and relies on ability grouping, especially in language arts.

2.0 is designed to raise the performance of the bottom, I get that. As far as meeting the kids where the are, it has failed, at least in Math.

And I am not for over accelerating, I am simply against reform math.

[Anonymous]

What is "reform math"?

[Anonymous]

What some Finns think Americans are missing about the Finnish education system:

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/12/what-americans-keep-ignoring-about-finlands-school-success/250564/

(Short summary: the goal of the Finnish education system is social equality, not excellence.)

(Quick fact: no private schools in Finland.)

[Anonymous]

More about Finland:

"...a Finnish child has a good shot at getting the same quality education no matter whether he or she lives in a rural village or a university town. The differences between weakest and strongest students are the smallest in the world, according to the most recent survey by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). “Equality is the most important word in Finnish education. All political parties on the right and left agree on this,” said Olli Luukkainen, president of Finland’s powerful teachers union."

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/Why-Are-Finlands-Schools-Successful.html?c=y&page=2

(speaking of closing the achievement gap)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is "reform math"?

Use words, non standard algorithms. Non mastery of math facts. More English, fewer equations. Desire to not teacher long division. Think that mental math is no longer useful. Spiraling. Group discovery. Favorite number in dairy entry. And more.

[Anonymous]

The way to tell reform math is when they say they are emphasizing understanding and not rote learning. As if knowing math facts and fluency in math operations are somehow hindering having a deeper understanding. Another trademark phrase is real world applications. I use math on a daily basis in my work and certainly have nothing against real world applications. But most of the real world applications found in the reform math classroom are very contrived and don't add to understanding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am ok with 2.0. I don't remember learning fractions in 2nd grade, so I'll consider that my 7 year old is learning fractions to be a bonus.

China and Europe must be laughing their arses off at how behind our curriculum now is. Unless they too recently revamped to massively slow down, cover less topics, and teach to the bottom.

2.0 is terrible for the kids who really love math and would have been the ones in the advanced math under the old curriculum. I agree with making sure that the kids are getting a good foundation, but my first grader loves math and is bored in class. Like i do, he has thatbkind f a mind. Once taught he just gets it- he wamts to do multiplication and division. He hasn't learn one thing in math this year that he couldn't do by October. I am teaching him at home the things that my older child did in first grade when she was given 2 nd grade math--
I am looking for math camps for next summer-- ridiculous.

We are participating in Dr. Li's math english this summer.