Lawmakers told Maryland Schools are Complacent and Middle of the Pack

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Catholic schools are the way to go.

Maybe.
Even highly regarded Catholic schools like Holy Cross or Good Counsel have median SAT scores around 1700 which is lower than Wootton, Churchill and Whitman (all with median SAT scores around 1850). Walter Johnson, BCC and RM also do better with median SAT scores around 1750.
Gonzaga does very well and is probably comparable to the top public high schools in the area

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Your post seemingly supports the structure and rigor of Cristo Rey, and it certainly underscores how low the bar is set in MD with 2.0---which no longer teaches handwriting or grammar and produces students who can't write basic sentences.

I, personally, do not judge the quality of a school based on how much time they have students practicing their cursive.

You may not find value in cursive, but ask any OT what s/he thinks about cursive instruction. My son is in third grade. He had fine motor issues, and while he loves school, he hated writing . . . until I paid out-of-pocket to have him learn cursive. He is a new child, and it took two months max to instruct him in cursive.

Watch high school students struggle through note-taking. It's painful.

The more slowly they write, they more slowly they process the knowledge.

If that's OK, with you, then you shouldn't be commenting on any educational matters. But I suppose ignorance is bliss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic schools are the way to go.

Maybe.
Even highly regarded Catholic schools like Holy Cross or Good Counsel have median SAT scores around 1700 which is lower than Wootton, Churchill and Whitman (all with median SAT scores around 1850). Walter Johnson, BCC and RM also do better with median SAT scores around 1750.
Gonzaga does very well and is probably comparable to the top public high schools in the area

Gonzaga is Jesuit.

And both Holy Cross and Good Counsel give scholarships to low income students because they take their mission to educate seriously. Plus, GC has a special program for students with learning disabilities.

The public schools are probably quadruple the size of the private schools. I'm sure that plays into the numbers of high achieving students as well.

Plus, the W schools have far more Asian and Indian students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Schools like Cristo Ray can kick out students who aren't pulling their own weight. I know because one of my former students was asked to leave. He had very little work ethic and while his teachers saw potential, nobody at home cared much that he was asked to leave. To his parents, what difference does it make where he goes to school? Read this article about a Cristo Rey student who wasn't allowed to attend graduation due to his latenesses.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/baltimore-city/bs-md-ci-cristo-rey-graduation-20160610-story.html
My DS goes to a private school now after years in public school. There is much more structure, discipline (behaviorally and in terms of work ethic) and basic skills are mastered before moving on to higher order thinking skills. I work in a Title One school and our district LOVES to tout the higher order thinking skills but our students often cannot write a complete sentence. They can't spell and their handwriting is often impossible to read. "It's the message that counts!" Um, no. Kids need the basics first and then they can move on to the higher order stuff. Our teachers assign basic HW and the majority of students don't do it. Simple stuff like spelling words three times each, basic math worksheets, etc. Nobody at home makes them do it. It is not a priority. That is the difference between poor Asians. Even poor Asians prioritize education. They work multiple jobs to pay for tutors. They value teachers. I have parents screaming at me at least once a week.

Your post seemingly supports the structure and rigor of Cristo Rey, and it certainly underscores how low the bar is set in MD with 2.0---which no longer teaches handwriting or grammar and produces students who can't write basic sentences.

I absolutely support Catholic schools especially Jesuit schools. They teach students how to write well. I didn't mention cursive in my post. I mentioned handwriting. If students have such awful handwriting that nobody can read it, their message is worthless. Basics like legible handwriting, proper spelling and grammar and basic organization is where we need to start. Forget the bells and whistles of technology until the later grades. I wish schools would stop spending previous resources on devices for young children. Many of them enter school unable to hold a pencil or scissors but they can sure swipe and enter a password. Everything is backward IMO. Teachers in public schools need to spend time teaching basic organizational skills too. I remember my teachers would dump out messy desks onto the floor when I was in school. I do not support this practice however students need to be taught that everything has its place. Their messy desks/seat sacks show that basic organization is not important.

[Anonymous]

Go Baltimore! Leading the way in maryland, as usual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So it all boils down to having a positive role model, expectation of success and the desire to succeed. This is honestly nothing new. This is why students who have all of these things (primarily this comes from the home) do better than those who do not. No matter how much title one funding and special programs we throw at something, unless those 3 things are present, then forget it. Why do you think schools like Whitman, Wootton and Churchill are consistently at the top? It's because the majority of the students there have all the factors that enable success.

This is true, if "all the factors that enable success" = money.

Money and for sure income is an output. A human capital earnings function where income is a function of work experience, education, skills, references, etc.

Student success also is driven by stable family, reading books, family values, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maryland was ranked number one in the country in the same survey only three years ago. Thanks Hogan.

Is that true? That’s pretty far to fall in just a few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic schools are the way to go.

Maybe.
Even highly regarded Catholic schools like Holy Cross or Good Counsel have median SAT scores around 1700 which is lower than Wootton, Churchill and Whitman (all with median SAT scores around 1850). Walter Johnson, BCC and RM also do better with median SAT scores around 1750.
Gonzaga does very well and is probably comparable to the top public high schools in the area

Gonzaga is Jesuit.

And both Holy Cross and Good Counsel give scholarships to low income students because they take their mission to educate seriously. Plus, GC has a special program for students with learning disabilities.

The public schools are probably quadruple the size of the private schools. I'm sure that plays into the numbers of high achieving students as well.

Plus, the W schools have far more Asian and Indian students.

"Gonzaga is Jesuit" So is the Pope! Not sure what your point is.
What percentage of HC and GC kids are low income? Actually why should it matter? I would assume that a family that took the trouble to apply for admission to these schools, went through the financial aid application process and figured out how to transport their kids to and from school are families that care deeply about education and support their children at home. I would also imagine that these schools get to pick their students (unlike a public school) and would select incoming students based in part on academic ability.
Walter Johnson also has a special program for students with learning differences and special needs.
Not sure how having four times as many students would impact the median SAT scores.
Not sure what to say about the "Asian and Indian students" comment. OK I can't help myself. Indians are Asian.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So it all boils down to having a positive role model, expectation of success and the desire to succeed. This is honestly nothing new. This is why students who have all of these things (primarily this comes from the home) do better than those who do not. No matter how much title one funding and special programs we throw at something, unless those 3 things are present, then forget it. Why do you think schools like Whitman, Wootton and Churchill are consistently at the top? It's because the majority of the students there have all the factors that enable success.

This is true, if "all the factors that enable success" = money.

Money and for sure income is an output. A human capital earnings function where income is a function of work experience, education, skills, references, etc.

Student success also is driven by stable family, reading books, family values, etc.

Thanks, Captain Obvious, for your original insight! By 'money' PP meant the parent's money, aka household income. That's what "the majority of the students there" have, and that allows them to attend afterschool tutoring that raises test scores and 'enables success'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maryland was ranked number one in the country in the same survey only three years ago. Thanks Hogan.

Is that true? That’s pretty far to fall in just a few years.

Maryland was ranked number one in country 2009 through 2013. http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/education/bs-md-maryland-number-three-20150108-story.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How come the Jesuit Cristo Rey schools and the KIPP charter schools can close the achievement gap, but MD schools cannot? Is there another county better resources than MoCo? Why can't MCPS achieve better results?

It might be because the Cristo Rey and KIPP schools emphasize character and discipline. That lays the foundation for learning. Have you ever observed your mcps classroom? Kids sit in groups where they chat and "work independently." Private schools teach at one level (like the Asian model praised by the linked article from The Atlantic), and kids receive constant instruction. It's intellectually stimulating.

Time isn't wasted on independent worksheets. Kids are taught proper penmanship and grammar---two items that have been dropped from the mcps curriculum.

Kids have text books or access to legitimate resources---as opposed to worksheets (at best) hastily thrown together by a team of nothing-special classroom teachers recruited by the central office to develop 2.0.

Bingo. So glad he spoke truth. We left MCPS for private, but at great personal and financial cost. Still burns me up that MCPS is supposed to be so great...what a joke. Our kids succeed because of the educated population here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/10/a-creative-way-to-educate-low-income-students/381461/

Background on Cristo Rey schools and their mission to break the cycle of poverty.

A friend is affiliated with one in Los Angeles, and the outcomes are nothing short of amazing. Everyone gets up to grade level or higher (most students start several years below grade levels), everyone graduates, everyone goes to college, and everyone is ultimately employed.

If you went to private school, you understand the difference between private and public when it comes to structure, discipline, and philosophy.

The biggest thing these schools accomplish is preventing kids from getting involved with drugs or crime. Once a kid sets down the wrong path, it's nearly impossible to succeed.

If we learned anything from Mark Zuckerberg's failed school experiment in Newark, it's that fancy buildings with fancy technology and fancy pants teachers aren't the solution. Closing the achievement gap entails kicking it old school: setting expectations, demanding excellence, and an all hands on deck approach to equipping students to succeed. We don't need Prometheun boards and chrome books. We need a better curriculum, structure, discipline, smaller class sizes, and more resources.

Exactly. Common sense. What you described is a typical private school environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Catholic schools are the way to go.

Maybe.
Even highly regarded Catholic schools like Holy Cross or Good Counsel have median SAT scores around 1700 which is lower than Wootton, Churchill and Whitman (all with median SAT scores around 1850). Walter Johnson, BCC and RM also do better with median SAT scores around 1750.
Gonzaga does very well and is probably comparable to the top public high schools in the area

Holy Cross and Good Counsel are not among the most highly regarded Catholic schools. And Catholic schools don't teach to the test. My son, who scored in the 89th% on PSAT, has a C average in a well regarded Catholic school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

So it all boils down to having a positive role model, expectation of success and the desire to succeed. This is honestly nothing new. This is why students who have all of these things (primarily this comes from the home) do better than those who do not. No matter how much title one funding and special programs we throw at something, unless those 3 things are present, then forget it. Why do you think schools like Whitman, Wootton and Churchill are consistently at the top? It's because the majority of the students there have all the factors that enable success.

This is true, if "all the factors that enable success" = money.

Money and for sure income is an output. A human capital earnings function where income is a function of work experience, education, skills, references, etc.

Student success also is driven by stable family, reading books, family values, etc.

Thanks, Captain Obvious, for your original insight! By 'money' PP meant the parent's money, aka household income. That's what "the majority of the students there" have, and that allows them to attend afterschool tutoring that raises test scores and 'enables success'.

DP here. Student success comes from being raised in an environment where education is prioritized and high performance is expected. Money helps for after school tutoring and enrichment programs, but it's not a necessity for success. There are plenty of kids who are highly successful in school that come from families who are not wealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not surprising.

Where are the recommendations to adopt more rigorous standards utilizing strategies and resources employed by the best school systems in Asian and European countries?

Let's NOT copy Asian school systems.