How to help MCPS' lowest performing students?

[Anonymous]

Public school cannot fix absent or uneducated parenting, OP. That is the main hurdle.

If you're going to pick ONE single act that will impact every child for the better, that would be smaller classroom sizes, so that every child receives more individual feedback from their teacher. Right now, at any grade level, you need to be pretty functional to follow instruction, just because the teacher cannot spend enough time with each student. Students fall through the cracks, especially if their parents don't know how to work the system, request 504s or IEPs, etc.

Of course, I know it's not one act. A lot of schools are overcrowded. It means building more schools, which is always a huge problem in MoCo. It means billions in expenditure that the County tells us we don't have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Public school cannot fix absent or uneducated parenting, OP. That is the main hurdle.

If you're going to pick ONE single act that will impact every child for the better, that would be smaller classroom sizes, so that every child receives more individual feedback from their teacher. Right now, at any grade level, you need to be pretty functional to follow instruction, just because the teacher cannot spend enough time with each student. Students fall through the cracks, especially if their parents don't know how to work the system, request 504s or IEPs, etc.

Of course, I know it's not one act. A lot of schools are overcrowded. It means building more schools, which is always a huge problem in MoCo. It means billions in expenditure that the County tells us we don't have.

Small class sizes are great but ultimately the teacher and the curriculum are the most important things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tutoring seems to come up frequently here. What has or does McPS plan to do to increase number of QUaliFIED tutors? Are they being hired, or are schools counting on volunteers? Can para s tutor?

MCPS does not provide tutoring. If you want tutoring you can pay for it. They offer Saturday school. For a few years via covid funds they offered tutoring and it was great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

This and the expectation at the beginning of kindergarten is not zero. So these kids enter already behind and unless they are smart, have excellent attendance, and a supportive home environment, it’s nearly impossible to catch up.

Universal preK isn’t the answer at all.

You want taxpayers to pay preK costs for middle class and higher income families? No thanks.

You can lobby for mandatory preK for lower-income families, but Universal preK would be a waste of money.

Smaller class sizes and a better curriculum, plus better discipline would go a long way in improving our schools.

We don’t have enough room for the students who are already in MCPS. It’s not going to help MCPS to add in tons of preK students to an already broken and overwhelmed school system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

This and the expectation at the beginning of kindergarten is not zero. So these kids enter already behind and unless they are smart, have excellent attendance, and a supportive home environment, it’s nearly impossible to catch up.

Universal preK isn’t the answer at all.

You want taxpayers to pay preK costs for middle class and higher income families? No thanks.

You can lobby for mandatory preK for lower-income families, but Universal preK would be a waste of money.

Smaller class sizes and a better curriculum, plus better discipline would go a long way in improving our schools.

We don’t have enough room for the students who are already in MCPS. It’s not going to help MCPS to add in tons of preK students to an already broken and overwhelmed school system.

Adding a prek class for all may not be a bad idea given lots of preschools now are play based adn they aren't adequately preparing kids for K.

[Anonymous]

1) Universal prek starting at age 2
2) small class sizes, meaning no more than 12 per room
3) one reading specialist for every 60-70 kids
4) one social worker per 60-70 kids
5) year round school 200 days per year instead of 175 or whatever it is, with the vacation time spread out throughout the year
6) one math specialist for every 60-70 kids
7) PE daily, mandatory recess, 2x a day for 30 minutes
8) mandatory 30 minutes of play in K-2nd
9) longer school day
10) fully stocked classroom libraries, school libraries staffed with full time librarians
11) one special Ed teacher per every 50 kids
12) kids with major behaviors are immediately given a 1:1 aide or removed from the school (and if major behaviors persist after 6 weeks with the aide, student is removed)
13) Students are engaged in real reading and real writing for at least 90 minutes a day.
14) Saturday morning intensive tutoring for students who are struggling year round
15) explicit and systematic phonics instruction
16) clothes pantry and food pantry for families to "shop" at whenever they need it
17) medical and dental care in a visiting trailer available once a week
18) ESL teachers, one for every 50 second language speakers
19) pay your TAs 75K to start and your teachers 200K to start, but hire only the very best of the best and then treat them like rockstars

All of the above, forever. We'd have stunningly awesome schools for not just the rich, but for everyone.

[Anonymous]

* Stop trying to be all things to all people.
* County/States should invest more in community centers
* Extend the school day by 30mins
* Strong curriculum and better implementation of said curriculum
* Strong accountability systems at all levels
* Mentor teachers and development teachers. * New teachers need to be an assistant teacher first
* Make all students take a 2nd/3rd language beginning in first grade. For some students this would be English for others something else.
* Lower the requirement for teaching FL. Other countries import English speakers to teach English regardless of whether they are teachers. Why do we make it so hard for other language speakers
* Better meals
* More movement in ES
* Less standardized testing. More teachers deeply knowing the standards
* Keep ES classes together for two years (pre-k/K, 1/2, 3/4, 5)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

This and the expectation at the beginning of kindergarten is not zero. So these kids enter already behind and unless they are smart, have excellent attendance, and a supportive home environment, it’s nearly impossible to catch up.

Universal preK isn’t the answer at all.

You want taxpayers to pay preK costs for middle class and higher income families? No thanks.

You can lobby for mandatory preK for lower-income families, but Universal preK would be a waste of money.

Smaller class sizes and a better curriculum, plus better discipline would go a long way in improving our schools.

We don’t have enough room for the students who are already in MCPS. It’s not going to help MCPS to add in tons of preK students to an already broken and overwhelmed school system.

Pay now, or pay more later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think we can help them by differentiating students based on where they are. That means no trying to do the impossible thing of SIMULTANEOUSLY keeping them on grade level when they're already behind and playing catch up.

Once a student is identified as being behind, MCPS needs to pull them out and focus on intensive 1:1 or small group work to help that child get up to standard. THEN when they are up to standard, you can look to reintegrate them. But MCPS cannot keep pushing kids who are behind grade level through grade level work and classes that they cannot comprehend or engage with.

We have demonized pull outs and differentiation and that needs to stop.

It's like they do this so Montgomery College can continue existing. And "It's embarrassing if Larla can't be in same reading group as Karla, they're in same XYZ clubs/extra curricular activities..." But sweet Larla can't read like Karla, yet.

What's with the gratuitous swipe at Montgomery College, which offers a lot of educational resources to a wide range of students at a much more affordable cost?

[Anonymous]

I was a teacher in Germany for three years. Their school system tracks kids into types of high school based on their ability levels and goals. This means that high-performing kids go to the most challenging, rigorous schools where everyone is expected to go to university, while kids who want to go into trades are in high schools with a built-in apprenticeship program and career services to help them move directly into their fields. And there are levels in between as well. Before anyone says it, no, you aren't necessarily "locked out" of uni if you don't go to a gymnasium, either. Everyone gets the kind of specialized support and programs to support them where they are and help them get where they want to go.

In the US, everyone is just thrown together, with the top falling to the middle and teachers desperately devoting all energy to pulling the bottom also to the middle. The actual middle-performers are left to languish where they are. It's a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher in Germany for three years. Their school system tracks kids into types of high school based on their ability levels and goals. This means that high-performing kids go to the most challenging, rigorous schools where everyone is expected to go to university, while kids who want to go into trades are in high schools with a built-in apprenticeship program and career services to help them move directly into their fields. And there are levels in between as well. Before anyone says it, no, you aren't necessarily "locked out" of uni if you don't go to a gymnasium, either. Everyone gets the kind of specialized support and programs to support them where they are and help them get where they want to go.

In the US, everyone is just thrown together, with the top falling to the middle and teachers desperately devoting all energy to pulling the bottom also to the middle. The actual middle-performers are left to languish where they are. It's a mess.

And the social/economic class of their parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

This and the expectation at the beginning of kindergarten is not zero. So these kids enter already behind and unless they are smart, have excellent attendance, and a supportive home environment, it’s nearly impossible to catch up.

Universal preK isn’t the answer at all.

You want taxpayers to pay preK costs for middle class and higher income families? No thanks.

You can lobby for mandatory preK for lower-income families, but Universal preK would be a waste of money.

Smaller class sizes and a better curriculum, plus better discipline would go a long way in improving our schools.

We don’t have enough room for the students who are already in MCPS. It’s not going to help MCPS to add in tons of preK students to an already broken and overwhelmed school system.

Pay now, or pay more later.

No, universal preK is more like pay more now and see no results later.

By the time the Head Start kids get to middle school, it has been shown that Head Start makes no difference.

We can’t just keep throwing money at programs that are not giving results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1) Universal prek starting at age 2
2) small class sizes, meaning no more than 12 per room
3) one reading specialist for every 60-70 kids
4) one social worker per 60-70 kids
5) year round school 200 days per year instead of 175 or whatever it is, with the vacation time spread out throughout the year
6) one math specialist for every 60-70 kids
7) PE daily, mandatory recess, 2x a day for 30 minutes
8) mandatory 30 minutes of play in K-2nd
9) longer school day
10) fully stocked classroom libraries, school libraries staffed with full time librarians
11) one special Ed teacher per every 50 kids
12) kids with major behaviors are immediately given a 1:1 aide or removed from the school (and if major behaviors persist after 6 weeks with the aide, student is removed)
13) Students are engaged in real reading and real writing for at least 90 minutes a day.
14) Saturday morning intensive tutoring for students who are struggling year round
15) explicit and systematic phonics instruction
16) clothes pantry and food pantry for families to "shop" at whenever they need it
17) medical and dental care in a visiting trailer available once a week
18) ESL teachers, one for every 50 second language speakers
19) pay your TAs 75K to start and your teachers 200K to start, but hire only the very best of the best and then treat them like rockstars

All of the above, forever. We'd have stunningly awesome schools for not just the rich, but for everyone.

Hilarious. Where do you think the money is going to come from?

Montgomery County has been importing poverty for the past decade. And we are losing middle income/higher income families.

Despite what our politicians seem to think, we do not have an unlimited supply of cash.

MCPS needs to focus on ONE mission of educating kids. There are plenty of non-profits and government agencies who can and should take care of the rest (medical care, etc).

MCPS is already too big and grossly mismanaged. Adding additional programs is a terrible idea right now.

[Anonymous]

[mastodon]

Anonymous wrote:Serious answers only. How can schools raise performances of students at the lowest levels? Free meals help nourish brains and bodies, are they "healthy" is questionable. What else? It it sending home books (lots of books) for them to read? More math practice practice practice. Is it helping change their attitude towards learning, less screen time? Is it identifying learning disorders in Pre-K (if eligible) or by K? Parents/guardians of these students need assistance too but there is time and language and cultural barriers- getting them information about identifying learning issues, ELL services, attitude/views about learning?

My two cents:
1. Decrease the use of screens - not only for academic work but no screens for entertainment or teaching a new subject. Teachers need to use white board or any material to teach directly I stead of playing a video to teach.

2. I think for children that are struggling or even just lower percentile- practice, practice, and practice of foundational skills in math and English are essential. Since HW is a problem for children with inadequate social support- I would recommend that it all be done at school.

Eureka was a waste of time, imo. Teaching Math concept well and then practicing it a lot is a great way to do well in Math. For 1-2 children that don’t understand the way it was taughtA the teacher can pull them to a table and try different methods of solving the problem- until they can understand the concept.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher in Germany for three years. Their school system tracks kids into types of high school based on their ability levels and goals. This means that high-performing kids go to the most challenging, rigorous schools where everyone is expected to go to university, while kids who want to go into trades are in high schools with a built-in apprenticeship program and career services to help them move directly into their fields. And there are levels in between as well. Before anyone says it, no, you aren't necessarily "locked out" of uni if you don't go to a gymnasium, either. Everyone gets the kind of specialized support and programs to support them where they are and help them get where they want to go.

In the US, everyone is just thrown together, with the top falling to the middle and teachers desperately devoting all energy to pulling the bottom also to the middle. The actual middle-performers are left to languish where they are. It's a mess.

And the social/economic class of their parents.

+1 Not to mention ethnicity. The Germany system was so highly stratified, and discriminatory toward minorities (even those whose families had been in Germany for generations) that they had to justify their approach to the United Nations. As a result, Germany is in the process of upending the school assignment process to include a lottery component.