MCPS is cuttting compacted math and cohorted literacy enrichment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

How did parents manage to save it then? Like, what was the actual process in getting the changes rolled back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

How did parents manage to save it then? Like, what was the actual process in getting the changes rolled back?

They flooded central office, the Board of Education, and school principals with calls and emails. They were furious.

[Anonymous]

I missed listening to the Board meeting but appreciate the recap here. So is there any hope of the Board stepping in and stopping this absurd proposal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I missed listening to the Board meeting but appreciate the recap here. So is there any hope of the Board stepping in and stopping this absurd proposal?

It's not a proposal; it's what MCPS is doing. They don't need Board approval.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do teachers feel about teaching a classroom of one-level math to teaching up to five levels in a single classroom?

We wouldn't know, becuase MCPS didn't bother to ask them.

Par for the course. Nor were teachers asked about the new curriculum. I understand compacted math may not be the perfect solution, but it’s been effective with moving students and keeping them engaged in math.

Keep in mind that there will be a brand new curriculum next school year. There will always be a learning curve when implementing anything brand new. Now imagine a class of 24+ students in an upper elementary classroom. Some of those students will be EML students with varying levels of English. There will be students with IEPs in the classroom. Accommodations must be provided by the general education teacher. Some students may have human reader and scribe accommodations. There will be students with behavioral issues that must be addressed. There will be students who are enriched outside of school and will be comfortable with the grade level material. There will be one teacher in the classroom. It is simply not possible for one teacher to meet every student where they are, providing remediation and enrichment simultaneously and seamlessly, while delivering the grade level content using a brand new curriculum.

Why do they constantly change the curriculum?

They reassess each curriculum every 5 years. It just feels like it happens all the time because a bunch of different ones have been switched over in the last few years, and they've all changed rather than stayed the same.

Why can't they pick a curriculum that works and stick with it? Do math and reading change every 5 years?

Reading definitely needed to change-- Benchmark was awful (and not aligned with the science of reading) as was StudySync in middle school so I heard.

Eureka I think they extended a couple extra years past the 5 but I also think they said Eureka wasn't able to make the tweaks needed to align with the new Maryland math standards. Also Amplify Desmos is apparently based off the current Illustrative Math curriculum they use in middle school so not much change there.

Why did they pick Benchmark? Also it seems like CKLA isn't awesome either. Can't they pilot a curriculum before rolling it out to everyone?

For CKLA, I’ve watched the approval process last year. They chose it over ELC mainly for its being much cheaper, and also it is strongly endorsed by Louisiana state superintendent who later became Maryland school superintendent or something similar. The fact that it worked as a miracle in Louisiana was because firstly, the average score was lower there so a positive growth in score is more visible. And secondly, that state held back students that were likely not going to pass the tests. So one actually couldn’t attribute the rising trend to CKLA. But who cares.

I had one kid go through with a mix of benchmark and ELC until this year, and the other has been with CKLA the whole time. CKLA has been a million times better for both.

Totally agree the shift away from tracking is very bad, though. My older kid is in 6th so I don’t think they’ll be directly affected since already tracked, but the younger one is in 3rd and would have been tracked next year. But it’s not enough for us to leave the district. Our jobs, house, and lives are here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

We have also seen on-ramps and off-ramps in person. Definitely were kids who went from Math 4 to compacted in 5th. Have also seen kids move from the regular MS history to the advanced class. In both situations it seemed like no big deal and a regular occurrence. These are not inflexible tracks that kids are shit out of because of 3rd grade performance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You know what graph you will never get from MCPS?

MCAP scores corrated to what out of school math education the student does, and parent level of math ability.

I don’t think parental math ability has anything to do with it. My kid is very advanced in math, I was not. I supplemented through ES, then we got a tutor. Both those things made the difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do teachers feel about teaching a classroom of one-level math to teaching up to five levels in a single classroom?

We wouldn't know, becuase MCPS didn't bother to ask them.

Par for the course. Nor were teachers asked about the new curriculum. I understand compacted math may not be the perfect solution, but it’s been effective with moving students and keeping them engaged in math.

Keep in mind that there will be a brand new curriculum next school year. There will always be a learning curve when implementing anything brand new. Now imagine a class of 24+ students in an upper elementary classroom. Some of those students will be EML students with varying levels of English. There will be students with IEPs in the classroom. Accommodations must be provided by the general education teacher. Some students may have human reader and scribe accommodations. There will be students with behavioral issues that must be addressed. There will be students who are enriched outside of school and will be comfortable with the grade level material. There will be one teacher in the classroom. It is simply not possible for one teacher to meet every student where they are, providing remediation and enrichment simultaneously and seamlessly, while delivering the grade level content using a brand new curriculum.

Why do they constantly change the curriculum?

They reassess each curriculum every 5 years. It just feels like it happens all the time because a bunch of different ones have been switched over in the last few years, and they've all changed rather than stayed the same.

It feels like it changes all the time because a) they keep selecting a different curriculum each time and b) by the time teachers and students are getting good at using it we’re already half way or more through the five year timeline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have a gifted or advanced kid, MCPS is basically telling you that it no longer will serve them. Math acceleration will now be within a heterogenous class just like model 2 of the CKLA enrichment this year. And they are getting rid of homogenous groups for CkLA enrichment next year. If you care at all, write to the board today before they discuss this this afternoon: Here is the deck for today’s presentation to the board on math. It looks like they are getting rid of compacted math all together and doing “acceleration” in mixed classrooms (however that will work). 5th graders are going to end up repeating content. They’re also proposing to get rid of cohorted enrichment for ELC. If you are concerned about this like I am, please reach out to the board today before they discuss this afternoon:
https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/DTUE6G38E612/$file/Accelerate%20Enrich%20Learn%20Literacy%20Math%20260507%20PPT.pdf

Mixed classes is "honors for all," which is why students read graphic novels"novels" in high school in English class.

Great job Thomas Taylor. We pay you $360K per year to dismantle excellence in the school district.

Sorry, this was gone before Taylor.

Mixed class in this context is not honors for all. It’s that once you get to Algebra the classes are a mix of students from various paths and grades.

[Anonymous]

I don’t get this model. Clustering just seems like groups in the classroom, which teachers already have. The students can change groups based on where they are at any given point. The challenge is that the most advance groups get the least amount of attention.

And without kids moving classrooms or schools moving to a functional model for teachers, how do they expect that students are going to move forward to the next grade level standards in an area? Most teachers don’t have the time or knowledge to provide a) increased depth of math in the current grade level, let alone an understanding of all the standards for say 2-3 grade levels.

And on behalf of the teachers, who is about to be writing all these individual acceleration plans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

How did parents manage to save it then? Like, what was the actual process in getting the changes rolled back?

They flooded central office, the Board of Education, and school principals with calls and emails. They were furious.

Is there any movement this this year? Or is it so late after so much change people are fatigued?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question- do other counties like Howard County still do meaningful differentiation even at younger grades (e.g. before high school?) I don’t think we can move realistically but if we could I would be looking at Howard County elementary schools tonight. I really thought we were making a good choice for our kids when we bought in MOCO but every year it seems to disappoint more for gifted kids.

Would love additional perspective on this. The slide deck makes it seem like they are doing this to align to state requirements to stop “tracking” kids. Just trying to figure out who to direct advocacy/outrage…and if moving to hoco would even help avoid this issue.

The state guidance says that you have to have onramps and offramps, not that you can't have standalone classes. But MCPS already has this. Kids is math 4 can take math 5/6 the next year if they do really well. On the other hand, kids in math 4/5 who don't do well take math 5 the following year. Both of these happened when my kid was in ES.

MCPS is blaming this on the state, but it's what they have been trying to do for a long time. I remember well when they tried to do it just before the pandemic. Parents rallied and saved it. But Taylor seems much savvier than Smith was at the time. He is timing it so they won't have time to create compacted math classes for next year.

How did parents manage to save it then? Like, what was the actual process in getting the changes rolled back?

They flooded central office, the Board of Education, and school principals with calls and emails. They were furious.

Is there any movement this this year? Or is it so late after so much change people are fatigued?

The only way to find out is to do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t get this model. Clustering just seems like groups in the classroom, which teachers already have. The students can change groups based on where they are at any given point. The challenge is that the most advance groups get the least amount of attention.

And without kids moving classrooms or schools moving to a functional model for teachers, how do they expect that students are going to move forward to the next grade level standards in an area? Most teachers don’t have the time or knowledge to provide a) increased depth of math in the current grade level, let alone an understanding of all the standards for say 2-3 grade levels.

And on behalf of the teachers, who is about to be writing all these individual acceleration plans?

I think their goal is to limit the number of levels within a classroom by grouping kids into 6 levels or whatever and then only giving each teacher 2 of them. That seems kind of nonsensical. It's not like by grouping kids they make all the kids within each group the same. It is just lipstick on a pig. And I think they are well, well aware of that.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, giving each teacher 3 of them