If 30% of kids in a school qualify for "gifted" why don't they address it in the home school?

[Anonymous]

In 2011, eliminating bus transportation to ALL of the "optional" programs (HGC, magnet, immersion, IB, consortia) would have saved MCPS $4.9 million.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/budget/FY2011/pdf/BudgetPossibleReductions_Recommended.pdf

The 2011 MCPS budget was $2.263 billion.

$4.9 million is 0.2% of $2.263 billion.

[Anonymous]

22:14: You ask for evidence. I'm not original poster, but here's some:

Teacher tells me at P-T conference that lesson plans were made to give my child and another 5 minutes of math at their level. Teacher recognized that the rest of the time these children were essentially doing review. This was a very good teacher doing the best he could in the confines of curriculum 2.0.

Child entered K reading chapter books. Put in classroom where no other child was reading and children were just learning letters. With much effort on my part, school agreed child needed more, agreed to a plan, then didn't have the resources to implement. School wouldn't move child for reading to a different grade.

Child got accepted to HGC. Teacher told me child HAS to go. Teacher tells me child can't get what he needs at current school. So, not just parent saying school can't accommodate. It's an insider who knows child and the system saying it.

Do you need more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:14: You ask for evidence. I'm not original poster, but here's some:

Teacher tells me at P-T conference that lesson plans were made to give my child and another 5 minutes of math at their level. Teacher recognized that the rest of the time these children were essentially doing review. This was a very good teacher doing the best he could in the confines of curriculum 2.0.

Child entered K reading chapter books. Put in classroom where no other child was reading and children were just learning letters. With much effort on my part, school agreed child needed more, agreed to a plan, then didn't have the resources to implement. School wouldn't move child for reading to a different grade.

Child got accepted to HGC. Teacher told me child HAS to go. Teacher tells me child can't get what he needs at current school. So, not just parent saying school can't accommodate. It's an insider who knows child and the system saying it.

Do you need more?

This sounds to me like a school problem, not a Curriculum 2.0 problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually think that the system is fine. HGC is available for the kids who really need it and I've seen no evidence that the other bright kids aren't accommodated.

Here's some evidence: many of the brightest kids in our Potomac elementary school have become discipline problems because they are bored out of their skulls. You want to talk about a hit to self-esteem, talk to these kids. Under curriculum 2.0, the teacher instructs a small group while the rest of the class does worksheets, "drop everything and read", or unfinished classwork. Is it even developmentally appropriate for kids in K-5 to spend an hour-plus of the integrated learning block directing their own learning? (Aside from the 20 minutes their small group is with the teacher.) Most of them twiddle their thumbs, doodle, chat with friends and end up getting yelled at for being off task. It takes a truly gifted teacher to be able to effectively instruct the 4-5 kids in small group learning while keeping an eye on the rest of the class to make sure they are behaving. I think curriculum 2.0 has completely unrealistic expectations of what teachers can accomplish when they are the only adult in the room with 20+ students. Or maybe Starr simply realizes that the kids who suffer are those who will meet the standard no matter what happens in the classroom, so they're not a priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I actually think that the system is fine. HGC is available for the kids who really need it and I've seen no evidence that the other bright kids aren't accommodated.

Or maybe Starr simply realizes that the kids who suffer are those who will meet the standard no matter what happens in the classroom, so they're not a priority.

I've long felt that the sentence in BOLD is absolutely true. The objective is to bring everyone to "proficient" and "close the achievement gap". There are no measurable written goals for the kids who begin the year in the "advanced" category, so they are not a priority. Some kids are percepctive enought to even verbalize that they know they are just ignored in class. My DC became "proficient" at doodling dinosaur pictures in 3rd grade ... it was sad. In 4th grade DC went to a HGC and it was like night and day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Is it even developmentally appropriate for kids in K-5 to spend an hour-plus of the integrated learning block directing their own learning? (Aside from the 20 minutes their small group is with the teacher.) Most of them twiddle their thumbs, doodle, chat with friends and end up getting yelled at for being off task. It takes a truly gifted teacher to be able to effectively instruct the 4-5 kids in small group learning while keeping an eye on the rest of the class to make sure they are behaving. I think curriculum 2.0 has completely unrealistic expectations of what teachers can accomplish when they are the only adult in the room with 20+ students. Or maybe Starr simply realizes that the kids who suffer are those who will meet the standard no matter what happens in the classroom, so they're not a priority.

I don't know. I know that it worked with the teacher for my first-grader last year. And she was a good teacher, but I don't think she was an exceptional teacher (unless most teachers are not good teachers). I also know that, at this same school, before Curriculum 2.0, children worked in differentiated small groups in the same classroom. I also know that we did this when I was in elementary school, around the Pleistocene Era (actually the 1970s).

Did you have a child with this same teacher before Curriculum 2.0? If so, how did that compare?

[Anonymous]

My son had a good teacher last year. She did as well as could be expected with providing different levels of instruction within the class;however there are limits to what even the best teacher is allowed to do under 2.0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If Montgomery County allowed a segregated classroom of students who tested as gifted in the home school, it would take them out of the classrooms with kids who are struggling academically and could benefit from learning alongside their more advanced peers. The county has a stated goal of bringing every student up to the level of proficiency. That is clearly a higher priority.

There is nothing in the MCPS model that allows an advanced student to help a struggling student. Its a teacher centric model. The kids struggling just see that others can do something that they can't, they get no benefit other than a hit to self esteem. The only person in the room that benefits from the way MCPS is doing this is the teacher. She gets a class where at least 30% of the students require no instruction and hands her positive test scores. She just has to discipline them to stay in their seats. She only has to teach the rest of the class.

Actually MCPS benefits because they can increase the class size since, 30% of the room is just occupying space.

Absolutely...agree 100%...

DS has been cruising through school for past 3 years...he is going to HGC in Fall and I hope it makes him sweat...because all this while he has not been challenged...and all it has done for him is to make him believe is that school is easy and he is super smart...

[Anonymous]

Yep, teachers are incentivized to teach to the bottom and make the top just re-re-re-review stuff until the bottom finally "masters the material". Being "proficient" (ie pass or fail) is the only goal. Not excellence, not advanced, not competitive, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:22:14: You ask for evidence. I'm not original poster, but here's some:

Teacher tells me at P-T conference that lesson plans were made to give my child and another 5 minutes of math at their level. Teacher recognized that the rest of the time these children were essentially doing review. This was a very good teacher doing the best he could in the confines of curriculum 2.0.

Child entered K reading chapter books. Put in classroom where no other child was reading and children were just learning letters. With much effort on my part, school agreed child needed more, agreed to a plan, then didn't have the resources to implement. School wouldn't move child for reading to a different grade.

Child got accepted to HGC. Teacher told me child HAS to go. Teacher tells me child can't get what he needs at current school. So, not just parent saying school can't accommodate. It's an insider who knows child and the system saying it.

Do you need more?

So your child will be going to HGC - problem solved?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Is it even developmentally appropriate for kids in K-5 to spend an hour-plus of the integrated learning block directing their own learning? (Aside from the 20 minutes their small group is with the teacher.) Most of them twiddle their thumbs, doodle, chat with friends and end up getting yelled at for being off task. It takes a truly gifted teacher to be able to effectively instruct the 4-5 kids in small group learning while keeping an eye on the rest of the class to make sure they are behaving. I think curriculum 2.0 has completely unrealistic expectations of what teachers can accomplish when they are the only adult in the room with 20+ students. Or maybe Starr simply realizes that the kids who suffer are those who will meet the standard no matter what happens in the classroom, so they're not a priority.

I don't know. I know that it worked with the teacher for my first-grader last year. And she was a good teacher, but I don't think she was an exceptional teacher (unless most teachers are not good teachers). I also know that, at this same school, before Curriculum 2.0, children worked in differentiated small groups in the same classroom. I also know that we did this when I was in elementary school, around the Pleistocene Era (actually the 1970s).

Did you have a child with this same teacher before Curriculum 2.0? If so, how did that compare?

Same here - this is how it was handled in the school district I attended. It worked well.

[Anonymous]

It seems like all of the posters who have said that there children were not accommodated in the past are now headed to HGCs. So they will soon be accommodated.

My older child is also headed to an HGC (though his experience has been different, and more positive, than others who have posted). This past year he and some other children were pulled out of class to work with a specialist several days a week (in both reading and math). I have a younger child as well and I think she also has been accommodated within the school.

I wonder if it is a school specific problem (as another poster suggested) rather than an MCPS problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like all of the posters who have said that there children were not accommodated in the past are now headed to HGCs. So they will soon be accommodated.

My older child is also headed to an HGC (though his experience has been different, and more positive, than others who have posted). This past year he and some other children were pulled out of class to work with a specialist several days a week (in both reading and math). I have a younger child as well and I think she also has been accommodated within the school.

I wonder if it is a school specific problem (as another poster suggested) rather than an MCPS problem.

It does make me wonder if it is school specific. Or teacher specific. In any event - glad to hear it is working in your school.

[Anonymous]

Actually, same school did fantastic job with older child who needed acceleration. So, seems to me that it's a curriculum problem rather than school specific.

HGC solves problem for 2 years. Then, we have to see what happens...again. HGC is necessity, but it takes too long to get to it and then it is short term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like all of the posters who have said that there children were not accommodated in the past are now headed to HGCs. So they will soon be accommodated.

My older child is also headed to an HGC (though his experience has been different, and more positive, than others who have posted). This past year he and some other children were pulled out of class to work with a specialist several days a week (in both reading and math). I have a younger child as well and I think she also has been accommodated within the school.

I wonder if it is a school specific problem (as another poster suggested) rather than an MCPS problem.

We are also headed to HGC, but if our home school was like this, maybe we wouldn't. Which school is this?