Is your principal allowing math acceleration and grouping?

[Anonymous]

To 22:14: Is it possible that, under the old curriculum, there were students taking Algebra I in 7th grade who were not ready for Algebra I in 7th grade?

More generally: for the the "C2.0 is dumbing down to close the achievement gap" theory to be true, the people at MCPS -- who are educators -- would have to have made a decision that narrowing the achievement gap by whatever means is so important that they are willing not only to deliberately keep children from being educated, but also to damage their own school system's long-standing reputation for high achievement.

Where is the evidence for this?

[Anonymous]

My 1st grader in a school that follows the University of Cambridge International Curriculum is learning:
- single and double digit addition and subtraction
- multiplication tables (2, 5 and 10 to begin with)
- division of same (starting with "jam tart" multiplication and division where they use cute little pies)
- simple fraction recognition (how many fourths in a whole, etc)
- telling time to the nearest quarter

In English, they are working on James and the Giant Peach, Because of Winn Dixie, etc.

It seems to me the MCPS equivalent would be maybe the end of 2nd grade, or even 3rd grade?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To 22:14: Is it possible that, under the old curriculum, there were students taking Algebra I in 7th grade who were not ready for Algebra I in 7th grade?

More generally: for the the "C2.0 is dumbing down to close the achievement gap" theory to be true, the people at MCPS -- who are educators -- would have to have made a decision that narrowing the achievement gap by whatever means is so important that they are willing not only to deliberately keep children from being educated, but also to damage their own school system's long-standing reputation for high achievement.

Where is the evidence for this?

not 22:14 but want to respond to you. Yes, it is possible and probably evidence that some students were overaccelerated in the old scheme. Furthermore, getting to algebra early should not be a goal in itself. This is emphazied by the common core and many practicing mathematicians who are paying attention to school math. So I agree with you on this.

However, there is also no evidence that putting students of all abilities in the same classroom is going to help the lower performing students. I believe that there is evidence to the contrary.

I don't think anyone is suggeting MCPS is acting out of malicious intent. However, good intention doesn't always mean smart strategy. I think MCPS may regret one day that they adopted some questionable practice in c2.0. I anticipate the grading to go back to ABCD by subject area one day and also switching rooms for math groups as they are doing for reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My 1st grader in a school that follows the University of Cambridge International Curriculum is learning:
- single and double digit addition and subtraction
- multiplication tables (2, 5 and 10 to begin with)
- division of same (starting with "jam tart" multiplication and division where they use cute little pies)
- simple fraction recognition (how many fourths in a whole, etc)
- telling time to the nearest quarter

In English, they are working on James and the Giant Peach, Because of Winn Dixie, etc.

It seems to me the MCPS equivalent would be maybe the end of 2nd grade, or even 3rd grade?

Last year, my then first grader in MCPS did all the math you listed, except the multiplication and division were not specifically called multiplication and division. It was disguised as skip counting exercises.

[Anonymous]

Last year, my then first grader in MCPS did all the math you listed, except the multiplication and division were not specifically called multiplication and division. It was disguised as skip counting exercises.

Congrats because your child will get to the same thing again in 2nd grade and again in 3rd grade. This is the problem. I didn't think 1st grade math was very challenging in 2.0. There were maybe 1 or 2 interesting things and everything else was material that DD learned in preschool. However, its first grade so I might be willing to give MCPS a pass on being challenging for 5 and 6 years olds. However, the poor kids have to do this stuff over and over and over again. They do it again in 2nd grade and I've heard from 3rd grade parents that they do the same stuff in this grade.

The constant repetition of basic things that most kids figured out the first time pulls down the entire curriculum so 2.0 gets worse and worse with every year.

[Anonymous]

My 1st grader in a school that follows the University of Cambridge International Curriculum is learning:
- single and double digit addition and subtraction
- multiplication tables (2, 5 and 10 to begin with)
- division of same (starting with "jam tart" multiplication and division where they use cute little pies)
- simple fraction recognition (how many fourths in a whole, etc)
- telling time to the nearest quarter

In English, they are working on James and the Giant Peach, Because of Winn Dixie, etc.

It seems to me the MCPS equivalent would be maybe the end of 2nd grade, or even 3rd grade?

This is definitely a 3rd grade acceleration taught in 1st. What are you all complaining about? Really.

[Anonymous]

Is this common for 1st graders to be reading and responding to books like James and the Giant Peach and Because of Winn Dixie? I get that some kids can decode to this level, but it seems way above what any 1st grade teacher should be using for reading discussions in a classroom. Even if my kid could decode James and the Giant Peach it would take weeks to get through the book.

[Anonymous]

My third grader (who is in the highest reading group and was just accepted to an HGC) read Because of Winn Dixie in class this year. I also have a first grader. That would not be an appropriate level book for her first grade class.

[Anonymous]

I am the parent with the first grader doing multiplication/division and reading Winn Dixie, etc - he used to be in MCPS, but we moved and this is the British University of Cambridge curriculum of his PRIVATE school. Sorry for the confusion, I just wanted to give you a comparison and get feedback, because we are planning a return to the area's public schools.

While I am disappointed at how slowly MCPS introduces math and reading (I have first-hand knowledge of more advanced Japanese, French and British state systems), I would like to point out that of course teaching more advanced topics to younger children always has to be done at their maturity level. I do not expect my child to understand and express himself (both verbally and in writing) like a third grader, even though he might love reading books like Harry Potter. Same for maths. The multiplications were introduced in January as "Jam Tart multiplications" and the little kids cottoned to it at once! Now in March they know the classic tables and solve word problems.

On one hand, it's good that basics are heavily insisted upon. On the other, it's highly frustrating that the children who need more cannot get it. Why can't MCPS try to copy other advanced school systems? I suspect they have little inducement for doing so, because politics require and reward other things: closing the achievement gap, etc. I believe they are taking the problem the wrong way round.

[Anonymous]

Yes, our MCES allows math grouping (some grades switch teachers and some create groups within each class) and acceleration for some students, though fewer than before 2.0. Current fourth graders on the accelerated path will have the opportunity to attend a local MS for math in the fall. Like a PP, I don't want to name our school in case it makes things harder for the principal to continue to do this. I know our school's admin has been allowed to do this, but has had to jump through many hoops along the way. Cooperative parent and teacher involvement played a large role in implementing this program and permitting this opportunity to continue, especially now under 2.0. FWIW, this is a red zone school, focus, but not Title I.

[Anonymous]

It is so sad that MCPS has now become a joke. No more long history of great results, the first class under the 2.0 recently received the MSA results. Complete disaster, below the Maryland state average in Math for the first time ever!!! And the crazy thing is that no one will fix it. This is not an experiment, this is ours kids. Everyone wants to blast the parent who thinks their kid is smarter than they are but the truth is simply that 50% of kids are now dumbed down in Math when it does not have to be this way. Just admit eliminating different classes for Math was a mistake and fix it. The egos are too big and our kids suffer. Put your kid in private school!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is so sad that MCPS has now become a joke. No more long history of great results, the first class under the 2.0 recently received the MSA results. Complete disaster, below the Maryland state average in Math for the first time ever!!! And the crazy thing is that no one will fix it. This is not an experiment, this is ours kids. Everyone wants to blast the parent who thinks their kid is smarter than they are but the truth is simply that 50% of kids are now dumbed down in Math when it does not have to be this way. Just admit eliminating different classes for Math was a mistake and fix it. The egos are too big and our kids suffer. Put your kid in private school!

Good Grief 2.0 is not reflected by MSA.
Previously they were teaching to that test.
So we have to wait for the tests geared toward the new curriculum .
Calm the heck down chicken little the sky is NOT falling!

[Anonymous]

The poor results on the MSA are a reflection is in the sub par quality of the math instruction. Dumbing down the test so that teachers can teach to that test is NOT the solution.

Its shameful that the math curriculum is so terrible now in MCPS. My 1st grader's teacher is giving him "enriched" math which just means that he doing a ton of worksheets involving the same problems. It keeps him busy so he isn't sitting there doing nothing or running around the classroom. Its busy work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poor results on the MSA are a reflection is in the sub par quality of the math instruction. Dumbing down the test so that teachers can teach to that test is NOT the solution.

Its shameful that the math curriculum is so terrible now in MCPS. My 1st grader's teacher is giving him "enriched" math which just means that he doing a ton of worksheets involving the same problems. It keeps him busy so he isn't sitting there doing nothing or running around the classroom. Its busy work.

It's not clear from your description what is wrong with his enriched math. Of course it will involve worksheets, and they will involve repetition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The poor results on the MSA are a reflection is in the sub par quality of the math instruction. Dumbing down the test so that teachers can teach to that test is NOT the solution.

Its shameful that the math curriculum is so terrible now in MCPS. My 1st grader's teacher is giving him "enriched" math which just means that he doing a ton of worksheets involving the same problems. It keeps him busy so he isn't sitting there doing nothing or running around the classroom. Its busy work.

Who's dumbing down which test, now? Once again; the previous standardized tests (MSAs) were Maryland's standardized tests, and the previous MCPS curriculum was designed for the MSAs. The new standardized tests will be national standardized tests, designed for the Common Core curriculum. 46 states, including Maryland, have adopted the Common Core curriculum. Curriculum 2.0 is the Common Core curriculum for MCPS.

What's more, the new Common Core tests are still being developed. So there's no way to know if they are, in fact, "dumbed down" or not -- unless you're working for the groups that are developing the tests?

And you're condemning the math curriculum in MCPS based on your first-grader doing worksheets? Did you have a first-grader in MCPS before the 2.0 math curriculum? I did, and I'm here to say that they did a lot of worksheets, and they weren't calculus worksheets, either.