Compacted Math Class Structure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

DP... if they accelerate a child who is not ready for it, then yes, it's bad. Why are they doing it? Parents complaining a lot that their kid can do it, even if they really can't? Administrators want to push URM kids who aren't ready into it to make the URM numbers look better? IDK. But, in either case, it's not helping the student.

Yes. Are you new to DCUM? When MCPS was doing a lot of accelerating, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was pushing their kids. When MCPS was going to maybe stop accelerating, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was holding back their kids. When MCPS went back to accelerating, but limited, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was holding back their kids. Now MCPS is accelerating more, parents are complaining on DCUM that MCPS is pushing their kids and that MCPS is holding back their kids.

Now, why did you bring up "URM" kids?

Because of the Metis report. They seem to be heavily focused on closing the achievement gap, which by itself, is a good thing to focus on. But, if the student is not ready for CM, then the student shouldn't be put in it. Doesn't matter what the skin color is. There are some wealthier white children whose parents push the school to put their kid in CM. Neither serves the student.

I'm just wondering why schools are putting more kids into CM. And it does seem to be a county wide thing, not just a few schools. When my older DC was in CM, it was the first or second year of it, and there were only something like twelve kids in it. This year, the number is more than double. I highly doubt that this year's crop of kids is that much more smarter than a few years ago.

Also, they changed the HGC test structure. Again, when my DC applied, it was something like a two hour test. Last year, it was 30minutes. Why the change?

based on what information?

Based on just the posts from here alone. But, let's take an informal poll here. Which schools have way more kids now in CM than two years ago?

I'll start. Ritchie Park.

And also, explain to me why HGC testing was changed? As stated before, I think it was due to the Metis report which focused on closing the achievement gap. Explain to me why else they would've changed the testing and why more kids are in CM than before?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Based on just the posts from here alone. But, let's take an informal poll here. Which schools have way more kids now in CM than two years ago?

I'll start. Ritchie Park.

And also, explain to me why HGC testing was changed? As stated before, I think it was due to the Metis report which focused on closing the achievement gap. Explain to me why else they would've changed the testing and why more kids are in CM than before?

The Metis report did not focus on closing the achievement gap. The Metis report was study of the choice and special programs in MCPS, commissioned "to analyze how well choice and special academic programs are positioned to advance MCPS’ mission, core purpose, and core values and to recommend ways the district can improve these programs."

http://news.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/staff-bulletin/study-released-on-mcps-choice-and-special-academic-programs/

Yes, the testing for the application magnet program for elementary schools was changed because of the recommendations of the Metis report. You can read about it here: http://www.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/ALXLAU4F2C1A/$file/Choice%20Study%20Update.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

DP... if they accelerate a child who is not ready for it, then yes, it's bad. Why are they doing it? Parents complaining a lot that their kid can do it, even if they really can't? Administrators want to push URM kids who aren't ready into it to make the URM numbers look better? IDK. But, in either case, it's not helping the student.

Yes. Are you new to DCUM? When MCPS was doing a lot of accelerating, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was pushing their kids. When MCPS was going to maybe stop accelerating, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was holding back their kids. When MCPS went back to accelerating, but limited, parents complained on DCUM that MCPS was holding back their kids. Now MCPS is accelerating more, parents are complaining on DCUM that MCPS is pushing their kids and that MCPS is holding back their kids.

Now, why did you bring up "URM" kids?

Because of the Metis report. They seem to be heavily focused on closing the achievement gap, which by itself, is a good thing to focus on. But, if the student is not ready for CM, then the student shouldn't be put in it. Doesn't matter what the skin color is. There are some wealthier white children whose parents push the school to put their kid in CM. Neither serves the student.

I'm just wondering why schools are putting more kids into CM. And it does seem to be a county wide thing, not just a few schools. When my older DC was in CM, it was the first or second year of it, and there were only something like twelve kids in it. This year, the number is more than double. I highly doubt that this year's crop of kids is that much more smarter than a few years ago.

Also, they changed the HGC test structure. Again, when my DC applied, it was something like a two hour test. Last year, it was 30minutes. Why the change?

based on what information?

Based on just the posts from here alone. But, let's take an informal poll here. Which schools have way more kids now in CM than two years ago?

I'll start. Ritchie Park.

And also, explain to me why HGC testing was changed? As stated before, I think it was due to the Metis report which focused on closing the achievement gap. Explain to me why else they would've changed the testing and why more kids are in CM than before?

Perhaps they are trying to offer advanced learning to more kids which sounds like a positive to me. The achievement gap is officially determined through standardized test scores -- so while this may be an attempt on MCPS's part to reduce the gap -- only the test scores are going to determine that. Unfortunately I don't think offering advanced learning to more URMs is going to have a big overall effect on the gap in a student population of over 160,000 kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

No. The problem is that MCPS has decided to accelerate kids who should not be accelerated just to make their stats looks good and to pretend that they are closing the ‘achievement gap’.

You're the second poster who seems to have assumed that the kids who can't keep up, in the top PP's post, must be poor/black/Hispanic kids.

NP here but the kids who can't keep up in DD's compacted math class are all white or Asian. Honest to god.
But I do think that, in general, MCPS is making a lot of changes just to rejigger the numbers and make it look like they are doing better instead of focusing on the real problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

No. The problem is that MCPS has decided to accelerate kids who should not be accelerated just to make their stats looks good and to pretend that they are closing the ‘achievement gap’.

You're the second poster who seems to have assumed that the kids who can't keep up, in the top PP's post, must be poor/black/Hispanic kids.

NP here but the kids who can't keep up in DD's compacted math class are all white or Asian. Honest to god.
But I do think that, in general, MCPS is making a lot of changes just to rejigger the numbers and make it look like they are doing better instead of focusing on the real problems.

You don't think offering more access to accelerated learning is a positive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

DP... if they accelerate a child who is not ready for it, then yes, it's bad. Why are they doing it? Parents complaining a lot that their kid can do it, even if they really can't? Administrators want to push URM kids who aren't ready into it to make the URM numbers look better? IDK. But, in either case, it's not helping the student.

Interestingly and anecdotally -- I have a friend who petitioned to get her kid (URM if that matters) into compacted math and our school wouldn't do it. So they aren't just letting everyone do it. About 40% of the kids in 4th grade at our school are in CM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

No. The problem is that MCPS has decided to accelerate kids who should not be accelerated just to make their stats looks good and to pretend that they are closing the ‘achievement gap’.

You're the second poster who seems to have assumed that the kids who can't keep up, in the top PP's post, must be poor/black/Hispanic kids.

NP here but the kids who can't keep up in DD's compacted math class are all white or Asian. Honest to god.
But I do think that, in general, MCPS is making a lot of changes just to rejigger the numbers and make it look like they are doing better instead of focusing on the real problems.

You don't think offering more access to accelerated learning is a positive?

I think MCPS is spending too much time and money lowering bars and expanding programs in strategic places just to make it LOOK like they are successful at closing the gap. But they are not really closing the gap this way. It's fake. They are changing the standards. I would have spent more of my efforts on the early education and STEM programs targeted at URM that they are putting in place. I think those will make a difference in the long run but they are too small right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our school rotates two CM classrooms along with two classrooms participating in the new ELC program. My son was just complaining this morning that some of the kids in class can not keep up and wonders why they are there because last year "they were in the lower groups" while in regular 3rd grade math. Sad that he is frustrated with CM because they cannot move faster because MCPS feels the need to try and bolster their Math numbers at the cost of the children.

MCPS just can't win. If they don't accelerate lots of kids, that's bad. If they do accelerate lots of kids, that's bad too.

No. The problem is that MCPS has decided to accelerate kids who should not be accelerated just to make their stats looks good and to pretend that they are closing the ‘achievement gap’.

You're the second poster who seems to have assumed that the kids who can't keep up, in the top PP's post, must be poor/black/Hispanic kids.

NP here but the kids who can't keep up in DD's compacted math class are all white or Asian. Honest to god.
But I do think that, in general, MCPS is making a lot of changes just to rejigger the numbers and make it look like they are doing better instead of focusing on the real problems.

You don't think offering more access to accelerated learning is a positive?

I think MCPS is spending too much time and money lowering bars and expanding programs in strategic places just to make it LOOK like they are successful at closing the gap. But they are not really closing the gap this way. It's fake. They are changing the standards. I would have spent more of my efforts on the early education and STEM programs targeted at URM that they are putting in place. I think those will make a difference in the long run but they are too small right now.

Are they changing the standards of access to programs or changing the actual standards of the curriculum? Meaning -- is the curriculum at HGC and compacted math different than it used to be? If standards of access have changed - I don't see a problem. But if they are watering down curriculum -- that is more of a concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think MCPS is spending too much time and money lowering bars and expanding programs in strategic places just to make it LOOK like they are successful at closing the gap. But they are not really closing the gap this way. It's fake. They are changing the standards. I would have spent more of my efforts on the early education and STEM programs targeted at URM that they are putting in place. I think those will make a difference in the long run but they are too small right now.

They are changing what standards? Do you know how MCPS measures the performance gap? It's not by percent of kids in compacted math, and it's not by application magnet programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think MCPS is spending too much time and money lowering bars and expanding programs in strategic places just to make it LOOK like they are successful at closing the gap. But they are not really closing the gap this way. It's fake. They are changing the standards. I would have spent more of my efforts on the early education and STEM programs targeted at URM that they are putting in place. I think those will make a difference in the long run but they are too small right now.

They are changing what standards? Do you know how MCPS measures the performance gap? It's not by percent of kids in compacted math, and it's not by application magnet programs.

It's not one measure. It's a lot of them. But enrollment of URM kids in compacted math is one. They also track applications, admissions and enrollment into magnet programs by race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Are they changing the standards of access to programs or changing the actual standards of the curriculum? Meaning -- is the curriculum at HGC and compacted math different than it used to be? If standards of access have changed - I don't see a problem. But if they are watering down curriculum -- that is more of a concern.

They will officially tell you no in terms of the curriculum being watered down but have you been in a compacted math class recently where they accept 60 or more percent of the kids in the school? Teachers are spending a lot of time with remedial groups while the other kids are playing "math" games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Are they changing the standards of access to programs or changing the actual standards of the curriculum? Meaning -- is the curriculum at HGC and compacted math different than it used to be? If standards of access have changed - I don't see a problem. But if they are watering down curriculum -- that is more of a concern.

They will officially tell you no in terms of the curriculum being watered down but have you been in a compacted math class recently where they accept 60 or more percent of the kids in the school? Teachers are spending a lot of time with remedial groups while the other kids are playing "math" games.

that is not a problem in our school --- they did not accept anywhere near 60% of the class. so perhaps that's a problem you need to address with your school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think MCPS is spending too much time and money lowering bars and expanding programs in strategic places just to make it LOOK like they are successful at closing the gap. But they are not really closing the gap this way. It's fake. They are changing the standards. I would have spent more of my efforts on the early education and STEM programs targeted at URM that they are putting in place. I think those will make a difference in the long run but they are too small right now.

They are changing what standards? Do you know how MCPS measures the performance gap? It's not by percent of kids in compacted math, and it's not by application magnet programs.

It's not one measure. It's a lot of them. But enrollment of URM kids in compacted math is one. They also track applications, admissions and enrollment into magnet programs by race.

its a measure of "performance" -- not enrollment.

[Anonymous]

If by "performance," you mean test scores that is another measure, but the Metis report was all about applications, admissions and enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Are they changing the standards of access to programs or changing the actual standards of the curriculum? Meaning -- is the curriculum at HGC and compacted math different than it used to be? If standards of access have changed - I don't see a problem. But if they are watering down curriculum -- that is more of a concern.

They will officially tell you no in terms of the curriculum being watered down but have you been in a compacted math class recently where they accept 60 or more percent of the kids in the school? Teachers are spending a lot of time with remedial groups while the other kids are playing "math" games.

that is not a problem in our school --- they did not accept anywhere near 60% of the class. so perhaps that's a problem you need to address with your school.

It is a blanket MCPS policy that different schools are addressing in different ways but it was the MCPS policy that encouraged schools to expand their programs.