New curriculum selection process delayed— new RFP must be issues now

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

I found the MCPS math curriculum pre C2.0 too superficial and fragmented so I spent time during grades 3_5 working with ds on Singapore Math during summer vacation. It cost around $100 for textbook, workbook and teacher’s instruction manual. The latter is essential. You don’t want to just throw workbooks at your child. You should actually teach them and the teacher manual is really excellent. The textbook and workbook are simple without too much distracting content but the manual is highly detailed and really teaches you how to teach your children There are different editions and I tried to get the one that was closest to the original Singapore based curriculum

m
Can you post the link to what you bought here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

I found the MCPS math curriculum pre C2.0 too superficial and fragmented so I spent time during grades 3_5 working with ds on Singapore Math during summer vacation. It cost around $100 for textbook, workbook and teacher’s instruction manual. The latter is essential. You don’t want to just throw workbooks at your child. You should actually teach them and the teacher manual is really excellent. The textbook and workbook are simple without too much distracting content but the manual is highly detailed and really teaches you how to teach your children There are different editions and I tried to get the one that was closest to the original Singapore based curriculum

Where did you get it? I'd like to start supplementing with my child, who will be in 1st next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

I found the MCPS math curriculum pre C2.0 too superficial and fragmented so I spent time during grades 3_5 working with ds on Singapore Math during summer vacation. It cost around $100 for textbook, workbook and teacher’s instruction manual. The latter is essential. You don’t want to just throw workbooks at your child. You should actually teach them and the teacher manual is really excellent. The textbook and workbook are simple without too much distracting content but the manual is highly detailed and really teaches you how to teach your children There are different editions and I tried to get the one that was closest to the original Singapore based curriculum

Where did you get it? I'd like to start supplementing with my child, who will be in 1st next year.

Also would you recommend I supplement over the summer with kindergarten or 1st grade math? My child's report card for K says that she regularly receives enrichment in math, but I don't know whether that is meaningful in any way.

[Anonymous]

DP, but for the past 2 years, we have supplemented with Beast Academy and Kumon. I wanted something organized that would teach topics in order.

Kumon workbooks are great because the repetition helps the skills become more automatic.

Someone on here recommended Beast Academy, and it's been fantastic. Bonus points that DC enjoys doing it. The books are cute, and they come with a corresponding workbook with well thought out problems to solve.

(Just wanted to suggest an alternative.....)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

The Singapore Math books I would recommend are the ones from singaporemath.com

Few years ago I had checked out singapore math books from a different publisher (Frank Schaeffer or Carson Dellosa - I do not remember) and found that it was better to avoid those books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

I found the MCPS math curriculum pre C2.0 too superficial and fragmented so I spent time during grades 3_5 working with ds on Singapore Math during summer vacation. It cost around $100 for textbook, workbook and teacher’s instruction manual. The latter is essential. You don’t want to just throw workbooks at your child. You should actually teach them and the teacher manual is really excellent. The textbook and workbook are simple without too much distracting content but the manual is highly detailed and really teaches you how to teach your children There are different editions and I tried to get the one that was closest to the original Singapore based curriculum

Which Singapore itself apparently no longer uses.

I used the Singaporemath.com books for my kids, and they're good but you do have to be systematic and start from the beginning. Also I suspect that the word problems gave us odd ideas about Singaporean culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

I thought this wapo article bent over backwards to portray them as having done little wrong. It also repeats the fiction that Discovery “discovered” they were involved in the bidding process when clearly discovery having bid on the project would know that the head of the curriculum office was involved In the process. I also thought it minimizes how pissed parents are about the delays. This thread is a gazillion posts long now.

Agree, the article missed several marks. Can you imagine if some def contractor was running a bid process while interviewing at Lockheed Martin one of the candidates and all paid for with taxpayer funds!? S/her be barred from the industry and Lockheed from the process.

Zero compliance or ethics here. You don’t raise your hand AfTER you bag the job or have your company offer accepted.

Poor kids, teachers and parents at mcps. Another major step backwards again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP, but for the past 2 years, we have supplemented with Beast Academy and Kumon. I wanted something organized that would teach topics in order.

Kumon workbooks are great because the repetition helps the skills become more automatic.

Someone on here recommended Beast Academy, and it's been fantastic. Bonus points that DC enjoys doing it. The books are cute, and they come with a corresponding workbook with well thought out problems to solve.

(Just wanted to suggest an alternative.....)

I second the Beast Academy workbooks. Right now it's only 3rd grade and up, but 2nd grade is in the process of being published. The books tend to be well above grade level, so I recommend being conservative with where you start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Not true at all.

Regardless, what do you believe to be top math methodology available? With a demonstratable track record of course.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

Honestly, the way mcps central office - all 1000of them or whatever - handle anything large or small, it likely won’t be good. Always way under market. Disappointing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

I thought this wapo article bent over backwards to portray them as having done little wrong. It also repeats the fiction that Discovery “discovered” they were involved in the bidding process when clearly discovery having bid on the project would know that the head of the curriculum office was involved In the process. I also thought it minimizes how pissed parents are about the delays. This thread is a gazillion posts long now.

a gazillion and one pages now

I read it another way. I think there were too many holes with regard to the dates. We know Discovery poaches. Let's face it; all corporations do this.

My issue with the situation centers on public monies and private corporations. As a public employee, you have a duty to those paying your salary. So your moves are open to public scrutiny - whether the moves are legit or not. To be fair, sometimes in a large bureaucracy, even the right measures "get lost." But in a case like this, any of the "poaching" should have been done after July 1/after official retirement.

In late March, the 2.0 audit results were shared (to jog one's memory - http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/2018/MCPS-Launches-Effort-To-Find-New-Curriculum-After-Report-Finds-Flaws-in-Existing-Materials/).

This was when Lang was approached by Discovery for a possible position. While bids were due early/mid-May, obviously the information was sent out at least a month prior to the bid closing date of May 11. April, which was when Lang was offered the DE position, was the overlapping month. Fliakas' job with DE appeared after Lang's, although he failed to provide a time frame to WP. So in his defense, perhaps a position sprouted up after Lang's talks with DE???

Lang and Fliakas are the 4th and 5th former (soon-to-be) MCPS employees to be hired by DE. Right now the team has 8 members mainly consisting of math and science folks.

People do what they need to do. And a nice retirement bolstered by a FT career at DE is a great gig. So they'll be more than fine during this second phase of their careers - even if they're leaving MCPS under these negative circumstances.

I don't question their motives; perhaps they've outgrown their jobs.

I simply question their "timing."

[Anonymous]

Lang should have quit when central office got the arid it results, then started the summary slides for the board and public.

No way someone can or will stay voluntarily or involuntarily after his work is exposed as vastly substandard.

[Anonymous]

Audit results

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but for the past 2 years, we have supplemented with Beast Academy and Kumon. I wanted something organized that would teach topics in order.

Kumon workbooks are great because the repetition helps the skills become more automatic.

Someone on here recommended Beast Academy, and it's been fantastic. Bonus points that DC enjoys doing it. The books are cute, and they come with a corresponding workbook with well thought out problems to solve.

(Just wanted to suggest an alternative.....)

I second the Beast Academy workbooks. Right now it's only 3rd grade and up, but 2nd grade is in the process of being published. The books tend to be well above grade level, so I recommend being conservative with where you start.

Agree about being conservative. We started with the 3rd grade books for my 4th Grader because I wanted her to get a fresh start and start at the beginning. Thought it would be an easy review, but turned out there were some challenging questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

I found Mr Lang surprisingly accessible and willing to meet with and listen to students and parents.

It is absolutely possible for Erik Lang to be a nice, smart, accessible guy AND also be responsible for designing and implementing a curriculum that has failed thousands of students all at the same time. I think he should have been fired. Doesn't mean he isn't a nice person, just means he did not do his job.