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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Another data point regarding Beast Academy: We have used Beast Academy as well as singapore math, for two different kids. I would suggest Beast Academy for those kids who are truly gifted; for those who learn fast but not necessarily "wired" differently, I suggest trying Singapore Math (from singaporemath.com), and if your DC finds it too easy/not challenging, then go with Beast Academy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't go to grade school in this country, and I admit I'm still trying to understand the peculiarities of US public education, from lack of textbooks and homework to overuse of screens.. so maybe someone on here could help me solve this great mystery of all times. If MCPS claims it needed to a new curriculum in 2008, why did they have to write it from scratch? Why didn't they look at curricula that were used at competitive privates for math, ELA, science, social studies, etc. - or at the best performing public school districts - and purchased bits and pieces (or even the entire sets) that were proven to work?

Why reinvent the wheel at taxpayers' -- and what's even worse, at students' -- expense??? I just don't get it.

New Federal laws meant all public school systems had to substantially change - there was no existing "off the shelf" material.

So what did other districts do? Clearly everyone isn’t having this issue.

[Anonymous]

We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't go to grade school in this country, and I admit I'm still trying to understand the peculiarities of US public education, from lack of textbooks and homework to overuse of screens.. so maybe someone on here could help me solve this great mystery of all times. If MCPS claims it needed to a new curriculum in 2008, why did they have to write it from scratch? Why didn't they look at curricula that were used at competitive privates for math, ELA, science, social studies, etc. - or at the best performing public school districts - and purchased bits and pieces (or even the entire sets) that were proven to work?

Why reinvent the wheel at taxpayers' -- and what's even worse, at students' -- expense??? I just don't get it.

New Federal laws meant all public school systems had to substantially change - there was no existing "off the shelf" material.

So what did other districts do? Clearly everyone isn’t having this issue.

http://www.singaporemath.com/Primary_Mathematics_CC_Ed_s/252.htm

We used these in our Florida parochial. in fact Singapore math, around since 1980 in America, was common core compliant right out of the gate in 2006-2008.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

I’d be curious when the 90 minute blocks of math, reading, and English began. That is a long time even if moving stations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't go to grade school in this country, and I admit I'm still trying to understand the peculiarities of US public education, from lack of textbooks and homework to overuse of screens.. so maybe someone on here could help me solve this great mystery of all times. If MCPS claims it needed to a new curriculum in 2008, why did they have to write it from scratch? Why didn't they look at curricula that were used at competitive privates for math, ELA, science, social studies, etc. - or at the best performing public school districts - and purchased bits and pieces (or even the entire sets) that were proven to work?

Why reinvent the wheel at taxpayers' -- and what's even worse, at students' -- expense??? I just don't get it.

New Federal laws meant all public school systems had to substantially change - there was no existing "off the shelf" material.

So what did other districts do? Clearly everyone isn’t having this issue.

No, no substantial change. Maybe Baltimore needed it but MCPS was ahead of these federal standards.
I fear MCPS used it to just do a a big, costly, failed in-house curriculum project with a large team of Gov’t workers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't go to grade school in this country, and I admit I'm still trying to understand the peculiarities of US public education, from lack of textbooks and homework to overuse of screens.. so maybe someone on here could help me solve this great mystery of all times. If MCPS claims it needed to a new curriculum in 2008, why did they have to write it from scratch? Why didn't they look at curricula that were used at competitive privates for math, ELA, science, social studies, etc. - or at the best performing public school districts - and purchased bits and pieces (or even the entire sets) that were proven to work?

Why reinvent the wheel at taxpayers' -- and what's even worse, at students' -- expense??? I just don't get it.

New Federal laws meant all public school systems had to substantially change - there was no existing "off the shelf" material.

So what did other districts do? Clearly everyone isn’t having this issue.

http://www.singaporemath.com/Primary_Mathematics_CC_Ed_s/252.htm

We used these in our Florida parochial. in fact Singapore math, around since 1980 in America, was common core compliant right out of the gate in 2006-2008.

How is this relevant to public school systems?

And how can a curriculum be compliant to standards that haven't been written yet? The Common Core State Standards effort started in 2009.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

I’d be curious when the 90 minute blocks of math, reading, and English began. That is a long time even if moving stations.

It's terrible, IMO! I volunteer a ton, mostly during the reading block, and it's crazy to expect five and six year olds to 'work independently' for 40 (or more) minutes. That's what ends up happening, since the teacher is working at the back table with one reading group at a time. I think that's why they are so dependent on Chromebooks even in grades K-2, because that's one of the few stations where the kids keep quiet.

[Anonymous]

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

No. Titling this a “potential conflict of interest” instead of a conflict of interest is the first clue that this article is a soft marshallow instead of dispassionate reporting. How Discovery or Lang or Fliakas can claim that all this just caught them by surprise (oh my!) and that as soon as they “realized” they rushed to report it is flatly unbelievable. If you are involved in public procurement, you just don’t go around marketing yourself to private vendors and then get religion the day you get a job offer. You just don’t do that and call it ethical. Lang may be a very personable guy, but this isn’t ethical behavior. There are plenty of personable and friendly people who lack ethical judgement. Dixon is right. There should be some very clear laws about this in MCPS.

MCPS already has very well-defined conflict of interest rules. The very first part of these rules says, very specifically, that employees are supposed to know these rules! For these two veteran staffers to suggest that they were somehow unaware of the ethical thin ice on which they were treading is simply, and literally, unbelievable.

Besides being recused from the now-delayed bidding process, did these guys face ANY consequences for their costly “mistake”? The story doesn’t answer that. In fact, the story mentions nothing about an actual investigation into this and the elected school board is AWOL. MCPS eats up about half of the county budget. It’s time for an independent Inspector General to have some oversight. Clearly, MCPS can’t police itself and the BOE either doesn’t care or lacks the capacity to really ride herd. I’m also starting to get a sinking feeling about Smith. He may be in way over his head and he doesn’t exactly have a squeaky clean history from his previous superintendent job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

You sound defensive. That is terrible, even for a public school any decade. Terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

I’d be curious when the 90 minute blocks of math, reading, and English began. That is a long time even if moving stations.

It's terrible, IMO! I volunteer a ton, mostly during the reading block, and it's crazy to expect five and six year olds to 'work independently' for 40 (or more) minutes. That's what ends up happening, since the teacher is working at the back table with one reading group at a time. I think that's why they are so dependent on Chromebooks even in grades K-2, because that's one of the few stations where the kids keep quiet.

WTF? Meanwhile in real schools, teachers and aides are leading small class discussions, practicing phonics, learning hands on science and playing with math manipulatives and tinker toys.

[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

No. Titling this a “potential conflict of interest” instead of a conflict of interest is the first clue that this article is a soft marshallow instead of dispassionate reporting. How Discovery or Lang or Fliakas can claim that all this just caught them by surprise (oh my!) and that as soon as they “realized” they rushed to report it is flatly unbelievable. If you are involved in public procurement, you just don’t go around marketing yourself to private vendors and then get religion the day you get a job offer. You just don’t do that and call it ethical. Lang may be a very personable guy, but this isn’t ethical behavior. There are plenty of personable and friendly people who lack ethical judgement. Dixon is right. There should be some very clear laws about this in MCPS.

MCPS already has very well-defined conflict of interest rules. The very first part of these rules says, very specifically, that employees are supposed to know these rules! For these two veteran staffers to suggest that they were somehow unaware of the ethical thin ice on which they were treading is simply, and literally, unbelievable.

Besides being recused from the now-delayed bidding process, did these guys face ANY consequences for their costly “mistake”? The story doesn’t answer that. In fact, the story mentions nothing about an actual investigation into this and the elected school board is AWOL. MCPS eats up about half of the county budget. It’s time for an independent Inspector General to have some oversight. Clearly, MCPS can’t police itself and the BOE either doesn’t care or lacks the capacity to really ride herd. I’m also starting to get a sinking feeling about Smith. He may be in way over his head and he doesn’t exactly have a squeaky clean history from his previous superintendent job.

Our PTA has been taken over by newbie K parents and I think we're going to go ronin next year. It's gonna be awesome!

[Anonymous]

https://marketbrief.edweek.org/marketplace-k-12/montgomery-county-maryland-district-pulls-rfp-curriculum-decision-worth-millions/
Montgomery County, Maryland District Pulls RFP for Curriculum Decision Worth Millions

an excellent review of the entire story

Discovery Education’s headquarters is located in Silver Spring, Md., about 13 miles from the Montgomery County district’s school central offices. The company, like most education businesses, employs former educators from across the country in varying roles. It would not verify that job offers have been made to the two individuals who submitted their notifications of retirement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were at the franklin, WI district before and all they did was tweak the English and math class and WI chose the ACT common core test (not Parcc). Kid still had gym 3x a week, art 2x and and hour each of five subjects (math, reading, science, SS, English/word work). MCPS jacked up at her math and reading class hours and cut others.

PE and art were once a week each at MCPS before Maryland's Common Core standards/PARCC testing and MCPS's Curriculum 2.0, too.

You sound defensive. That is terrible, even for a public school any decade. Terrible.

It's not defensive. It's a fact.