Starr on Kojo's Show on Math Acceleration

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: But I will still demand specifics rather than just vitriol against entitled parents who think their kids are special. Deal?

So, this is an effort by entitled parents who think their kids are special?!

[Anonymous]

So, this is an effort by entitled parents who think their kids are special?!

Why should MCPS provide any educational services for children in Montgomery County anyway? Why do parents of children in the County feel entitled to any educational services? They are clearly NOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So, this is an effort by entitled parents who think their kids are special?!

Why should MCPS provide any educational services for children in Montgomery County anyway? Why do parents of children in the County feel entitled to any educational services? They are clearly NOT.

Why does it bother you so much that parents want the best for their children. We pay taxes and have every right in the world to demand certain things from our educational system. You sound very jealous and bitter. Your comments are not helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Starr is contemptuous of parents. You can hear it in his voice and as a subtle undertone in all his comments. It was obvious during his parent forum on gifted ed.

He doesn't care what you think.

Then explain to us why he is now saying, loud and clear for everyone th hear, MCPS has not eliminated acceleration pathways in math? Could it really be he is listening? He knows his head will roll with such a regreesive and preposterous move to prohibit math acceleration for the willing with mastery.

Do you think for one fleeting moment teachers, MCPS and Starr are not reading this Board?

He says acceleration is available for kids who really need it but can't or won't identify the criteria. I think he means that the small % of kids who are in GT magnets will get it. I don't see any evidence that he intends to accelerate kids in regular school programs. The proof will be in the pudding.

Did you attend the parent meeting he held on GT? It was sick-making.

And yes, I'm sure someone in MCPS reads this board every day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Starr is contemptuous of parents. You can hear it in his voice and as a subtle undertone in all his comments. It was obvious during his parent forum on gifted ed.

He doesn't care what you think.

Then explain to us why he is now saying, loud and clear for everyone th hear, MCPS has not eliminated acceleration pathways in math? Could it really be he is listening? He knows his head will roll with such a regreesive and preposterous move to prohibit math acceleration for the willing with mastery.

Do you think for one fleeting moment teachers, MCPS and Starr are not reading this Board?

He says acceleration is available for kids who really need it but can't or won't identify the criteria. I think he means that the small % of kids who are in GT magnets will get it. I don't see any evidence that he intends to accelerate kids in regular school programs. The proof will be in the pudding.

Did you attend the parent meeting he held on GT? It was sick-making.

And yes, I'm sure someone in MCPS reads this board every day.

Look, if you'd read the GT email lists and become aware of the way the GT people were planning to conduct themselves at the GT meeting with Starr, you'd probably make sure it was highly choreographed. Don't forget the stink the GT in MoCo raised about losing the label.

I have been sympathetic to this cause until I saw the fake "PhD in math" and the same individual repeatedly posting to realize that this was not about education. It was about parental ego.

[Anonymous]

The fact that there are some flaky parents, some who are too interested in "labels," some who annoy you, some who are all about "parental ego," etc. doesn't change the fact that MCPS cannot adequately explain this new curriculum. There are kids in MCPS this year who are sitting in classrooms repeating work that they may have done 2 years ago. No one in MCPS can adequately explain why the roll-out allowed this to happen to *these kids* *this year.*

I have held an open mind to 2.0, but my trust has eroded as I attend meetings about 2.0 where no one can describe why this situation wasn't foreseen and mitigated as part of the roll out.

In addition, there is a lot of consultant-speak double talk that seems designed to complicate matters rather than explain the new curriculum in a concise manner. Typically when an organization cannot explain why and how it is doing something, it means incompetence or hidden motives. I fear that is the case here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that there are some flaky parents, some who are too interested in "labels," some who annoy you, some who are all about "parental ego," etc. doesn't change the fact that MCPS cannot adequately explain this new curriculum. There are kids in MCPS this year who are sitting in classrooms repeating work that they may have done 2 years ago. No one in MCPS can adequately explain why the roll-out allowed this to happen to *these kids* *this year.*

I have held an open mind to 2.0, but my trust has eroded as I attend meetings about 2.0 where no one can describe why this situation wasn't foreseen and mitigated as part of the roll out.

In addition, there is a lot of consultant-speak double talk that seems designed to complicate matters rather than explain the new curriculum in a concise manner. Typically when an organization cannot explain why and how it is doing something, it means incompetence or hidden motives. I fear that is the case here.

Why don't you carefully write down the things you want MCPS to explain to you and send it to 'em in an email? Perhaps you have failed to articulate what you want to know about C 2.0 in an understandable manner?

[Anonymous]

Why don't you carefully write down the things you want MCPS to explain to you and send it to 'em in an email? Perhaps you have failed to articulate what you want to know about C 2.0 in an understandable manner?

you have got to be kiddin. you mean it is not obvious? the failure here is the incapacity to read carefully the previous posts!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why don't you carefully write down the things you want MCPS to explain to you and send it to 'em in an email? Perhaps you have failed to articulate what you want to know about C 2.0 in an understandable manner?

you have got to be kiddin. you mean it is not obvious? the failure here is the incapacity to read carefully the previous posts!

Yeah, I guess you want MCPS to respond to anonymous rants. Get out of hiding and express your concerns in public or shut up.

[Anonymous]

We are. But we don't see or hear you.

[Anonymous]

Free consultative services to Starr, MCPS and the concerned:


http://cambridgeadvanced.org/advanced-learning-in-the-cambridge-public-schools/subject-acceleration-protocol/
http://cambridgeadvanced.org/wp-content/pdfs/Subject-Acceleration-Protocol.pdf
http://cambridgeadvanced.org/advanced-learning-in-the-cambridge-public-schools/academic-challenge-policy/
http://cambridgeadvanced.org/advanced-learning-in-the-cambridge-pubhttp://www.olentangy.k12.oh.us/administrative-departments/pupil-services/gifted-services/district-policy-on-academic-acceleration-early-entrance-to-kindergarten-and-early-high-school-graduation/lic-schools/academic-challenge-policy/http://www.tagpdx.org/math_acceleration_policy.pdfhttp://www.curriculumsupport.education.nsw.gov.au/policies/gats/assets/pdf/gdlk6accprggen.pdf

[Anonymous]

Here is what is done in Portland, Oregon (math)

http://www.tagpdx.org/math_acceleration_policy.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You said: "To test giftedness, you really have to test above grade level, not at grade level." That is what all this is really about--using math to have your well prepared child classified as gifted. Getting the child labeled gifted by forcing MCPS to accelerate them!!! Do you really think MCPS hasn't figured you people out?

You are a moron and are doing a disservice to every highly able child out there. Gifted children, such as my son, test above grade level even without preparation, or they take IQ tests such as the WISC-IV and get scores above 130, again without preparation.
These children, potentially the future brains of our country, are actually a subset of the special needs students - if they cannot receive acceleration, many of them will fail.

Why wouldn't this student be in a magnet if they are so advanced?

[Anonymous]

The decision (case by case) for subject acceleration should ideally be made in the absence of labels. Hard data will suffice. This should take care of the poster's concerns about labels.

[Anonymous]

Some magnet programs are inconveniently located 1 + hour from the home.