HGC 4th grade this year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FCPS has about 20% of its kids in GT programs..but the program is not supposed to be so great/different. If you want a truely advanced program you have to just look to the top 3%..which is about what the really gifted population is.

Heard the 3% number a few times. Here are some questions.
Is top 3% in Kentucky the same as top 3% in New York?
Is top 3% in New York the same as top 3% in Manhattan?
Is top 3% in Montgomery county the same as top 3% in Finland, Japan, Hong Kong, or what ever?

Why does that matter? Schools are local.

It is the top 3% of the local population (whatever that is). By definition, someone in the 99th percentile has needs vastly different from those of someone in the 50th percentile.

No that's silly. The percentage of people with "gifted" level of IQ's is just higher in some areas than others. (Highest in Cambridge, MA, i believe, for this country.) So are you saying that only 3% of the kids in Cambridge should be allowed to have "gifted" curricula? Because it has to be the same percentage as it is everywhere else? That makes no sense. If you use the same cutoff, you will have some areas with a much higher percentage of kids who make the cutoff than others.
Saying you have to be in the 99th percentile of MoCo kids makes no sense. It's a skewed sample.

[Anonymous]

No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

Exactly. By and large the standard curriculum of a given place reflects that place's demographics. You will find a different curriculum in a county school system in e.g. rural Alabama than you will in MoCo or Cambridge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both my kids are in hgc and magnet. They are bright, respectful, focused, social, normal kids. The reason they are in these programs are because as an East Indian parent I find the curriculum in mcps severely lacking as compared to that offered in private schools in India. Hgc and magnets in mcps actually does a semi decent job in my opinion.

So if mcps decides to implement the hgc and magnet standards and curriculum to the entire student population and close hgc and magnets, I won't object. I think that will still not be the bench mark as compared to other nations, but it will be in the respectable range.

I am also Indian with a kid in a hgc and a middle school magnet. I agree with your comments about the regular MCPS curriculum (including their "advanced" MS offerings). However, I disagree with your comments about the HGC and especially the MS magnets. My child is reading books and doing projects that require a lot of critical thinking, in depth research and advanced writing skills. I do not recollect doing work at this level when I was in my (excellent) private school (comparing our experiences for the same grade).
I agree with a PP who thought that if the curriculum was introduced in the regular middle schools (even for advanced learners) it would get watered down. I also think most children (and their parents) would chafe under the work load - it is not unusual to have a research paper, a couple of presentations, a video project and a couple of tests all due in a single week and this is on top of your regular homework. The kids at the middle and High school magnets are selected because they need the enriched curriculum and thrive under the atmosphere of high expectations. The peer group is another reason why it is hard to reproduce the magnet experience in a regular school - the peer group just can't be reproduced. I used to wish my children could stay in their home schools and just get the HGC/magnet curriculum but once your child attends the programs you understand why it just would not be the same. The peer group makes a huge difference. It allows the teachers to move quickly, to dig deeper and make connections across disciplines. It makes it possible for a class of 25 children to spend half an hour discussing one paragraph in Fahrenheit 451 as dc's class did last year in sixth grade.
I am very impressed by and grateful for the magnet programs MCPS offers and more than a little nervous about the impact of Common Core.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both my kids are in hgc and magnet. They are bright, respectful, focused, social, normal kids. The reason they are in these programs are because as an East Indian parent I find the curriculum in mcps severely lacking as compared to that offered in private schools in India. Hgc and magnets in mcps actually does a semi decent job in my opinion.

So if mcps decides to implement the hgc and magnet standards and curriculum to the entire student population and close hgc and magnets, I won't object. I think that will still not be the bench mark as compared to other nations, but it will be in the respectable range.

You are comparing apples and oranges. MCPS are public, not private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both my kids are in hgc and magnet. They are bright, respectful, focused, social, normal kids. The reason they are in these programs are because as an East Indian parent I find the curriculum in mcps severely lacking as compared to that offered in private schools in India. Hgc and magnets in mcps actually does a semi decent job in my opinion.

So if mcps decides to implement the hgc and magnet standards and curriculum to the entire student population and close hgc and magnets, I won't object. I think that will still not be the bench mark as compared to other nations, but it will be in the respectable range.

I am also Indian with a kid in a hgc and a middle school magnet. I agree with your comments about the regular MCPS curriculum (including their "advanced" MS offerings). However, I disagree with your comments about the HGC and especially the MS magnets. My child is reading books and doing projects that require a lot of critical thinking, in depth research and advanced writing skills. I do not recollect doing work at this level when I was in my (excellent) private school (comparing our experiences for the same grade).
I agree with a PP who thought that if the curriculum was introduced in the regular middle schools (even for advanced learners) it would get watered down. I also think most children (and their parents) would chafe under the work load - it is not unusual to have a research paper, a couple of presentations, a video project and a couple of tests all due in a single week and this is on top of your regular homework. The kids at the middle and High school magnets are selected because they need the enriched curriculum and thrive under the atmosphere of high expectations. The peer group is another reason why it is hard to reproduce the magnet experience in a regular school - the peer group just can't be reproduced. I used to wish my children could stay in their home schools and just get the HGC/magnet curriculum but once your child attends the programs you understand why it just would not be the same. The peer group makes a huge difference. It allows the teachers to move quickly, to dig deeper and make connections across disciplines. It makes it possible for a class of 25 children to spend half an hour discussing one paragraph in Fahrenheit 451 as dc's class did last year in sixth grade.
I am very impressed by and grateful for the magnet programs MCPS offers and more than a little nervous about the impact of Common Core.

I am a plain old white American (LOL) but have had the same experience in the HGC and MS and HS magnets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

Exactly. By and large the standard curriculum of a given place reflects that place's demographics. You will find a different curriculum in a county school system in e.g. rural Alabama than you will in MoCo or Cambridge.

A question is why Common core fits MoCo then. I have to say that the strategy of 3% sounds make sense. However, the two comments above exactly dispute the foundation of the common core to some extent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

Exactly. By and large the standard curriculum of a given place reflects that place's demographics. You will find a different curriculum in a county school system in e.g. rural Alabama than you will in MoCo or Cambridge.

A question is why Common core fits MoCo then. I have to say that the strategy of 3% sounds make sense. However, the two comments above exactly dispute the foundation of the common core to some extent.

I don't disagree. Given the vast differences among the various regions of the country, I'm not sure how Common Core will truly work.

This is part of why those reports bemoaning how the U.S. ranks some crazy-high number in world competency surveys in e.g. science and math are kind of meaningless. If Massachusetts were a country it would rank second in science and very high in math:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/science/expecting-the-best-yields-results-in-massachusetts.html?_r=0

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

Exactly. By and large the standard curriculum of a given place reflects that place's demographics. You will find a different curriculum in a county school system in e.g. rural Alabama than you will in MoCo or Cambridge.

A question is why Common core fits MoCo then. I have to say that the strategy of 3% sounds make sense. However, the two comments above exactly dispute the foundation of the common core to some extent.

The Common Core is not a curriculum. The Common Core is standards. In this grade, students should be able to do [this], and they should be able to do [that]. You can look the standards up here:

http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards

School districts design their curricula so that they align with the Common Core standards.

Please note that "aligning with the Common Core standards" does not mean "students will be able to do this AND NOTHING MORE".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I don't disagree. Given the vast differences among the various regions of the country, I'm not sure how Common Core will truly work.

The vast differences among the various regions of the country are the whole reason for the Common Core.

Every state that adopts the Common Core will have the same standards for the same grades. So students who move from district to district or state to state will not get (for example) the same lesson in fractions three years in a row, but no decimals because that was always a different year.

[Anonymous]

Yes..but fractions can be taught on a variety of levels. Multiplication of fractions can even be taught on a variety of levels. Literature offers even more options. Student A writes a Haiku. Student B composes a poetry book.. Student A takes a multiple choice test. Student B has an essay test. Common Core does not give everyone the same lessons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No..it is saying the top 3% probably need a curriculumn that is different from the majority. MoCo kids may be as a whole more affluent etc then kids from a rural area and can handle an overall more challenging curriculum (or so we would like to believe)..but that doesn't mean that most can't be in a standard MoCo classroom.

Exactly. By and large the standard curriculum of a given place reflects that place's demographics. You will find a different curriculum in a county school system in e.g. rural Alabama than you will in MoCo or Cambridge.

A question is why Common core fits MoCo then. I have to say that the strategy of 3% sounds make sense. However, the two comments above exactly dispute the foundation of the common core to some extent.

I don't disagree. Given the vast differences among the various regions of the country, I'm not sure how Common Core will truly work.

This is part of why those reports bemoaning how the U.S. ranks some crazy-high number in world competency surveys in e.g. science and math are kind of meaningless. If Massachusetts were a country it would rank second in science and very high in math:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/03/science/expecting-the-best-yields-results-in-massachusetts.html?_r=0

Excellent point! The issue with Common Core is that, on some level, it ignores this reality and approaches curriculum standards as if students across the country were all performing at the "average point" when plenty are excelling (your Cambridge, MA example). Areas where excellence is happening need to be encouraged (and, perhaps even more rigor could be added), areas where sub-par performance is happening need extra encouragement/support. But, to treat the entire country as if the performance was similar across the board ignores the truth and obscures the areas where need exists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't disagree. Given the vast differences among the various regions of the country, I'm not sure how Common Core will truly work.

The vast differences among the various regions of the country are the whole reason for the Common Core.

Every state that adopts the Common Core will have the same standards for the same grades. So students who move from district to district or state to state will not get (for example) the same lesson in fractions three years in a row, but no decimals because that was always a different year.

So, the primary reason for this Common Core is related to student mobility?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Both my kids are in hgc and magnet. They are bright, respectful, focused, social, normal kids. The reason they are in these programs are because as an East Indian parent I find the curriculum in mcps severely lacking as compared to that offered in private schools in India. Hgc and magnets in mcps actually does a semi decent job in my opinion.

So if mcps decides to implement the hgc and magnet standards and curriculum to the entire student population and close hgc and magnets, I won't object. I think that will still not be the bench mark as compared to other nations, but it will be in the respectable range.

I am also Indian with a kid in a hgc and a middle school magnet. I agree with your comments about the regular MCPS curriculum (including their "advanced" MS offerings). However, I disagree with your comments about the HGC and especially the MS magnets. My child is reading books and doing projects that require a lot of critical thinking, in depth research and advanced writing skills. I do not recollect doing work at this level when I was in my (excellent) private school (comparing our experiences for the same grade).
I agree with a PP who thought that if the curriculum was introduced in the regular middle schools (even for advanced learners) it would get watered down. I also think most children (and their parents) would chafe under the work load - it is not unusual to have a research paper, a couple of presentations, a video project and a couple of tests all due in a single week and this is on top of your regular homework. The kids at the middle and High school magnets are selected because they need the enriched curriculum and thrive under the atmosphere of high expectations. The peer group is another reason why it is hard to reproduce the magnet experience in a regular school - the peer group just can't be reproduced. I used to wish my children could stay in their home schools and just get the HGC/magnet curriculum but once your child attends the programs you understand why it just would not be the same. The peer group makes a huge difference. It allows the teachers to move quickly, to dig deeper and make connections across disciplines. It makes it possible for a class of 25 children to spend half an hour discussing one paragraph in Fahrenheit 451 as dc's class did last year in sixth grade.
I am very impressed by and grateful for the magnet programs MCPS offers and more than a little nervous about the impact of Common Core.

None of us worked as hard as the kids do today. There was less competition. I am comparing what the kids are doing today in India vs. what my kids are doing today here. Am I happy with the peer group? Yes, absolutely - it is the best thing in the whole experience as well as the parental involvement - which is wonderful. But the curriculum is something that I feel should be offered to all children. Yes, I find it enriched...but this enrichment should be offered to all kids. The enrichment part is what will get all kids motivated. The field trips, documentaries, discussions, projects - these parts should be made available to all kids in a perfect resource rich world - and this part is not what the kids find difficult. For most kids this is the engaging and fun part.

As for non-hgc, non-magnet kids and parents chafing under the heavy load argument - I have heard that and I do not believe that completely. When we moved to HGC from the regular school, the entire family needed to get their act together. It was a shift and the first few months were tough. Now, this is our regular way of life. We still socialize and do sports and extra-curricular activities and volunteer - it is just that we are managing our time better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I don't disagree. Given the vast differences among the various regions of the country, I'm not sure how Common Core will truly work.

The vast differences among the various regions of the country are the whole reason for the Common Core.

Every state that adopts the Common Core will have the same standards for the same grades. So students who move from district to district or state to state will not get (for example) the same lesson in fractions three years in a row, but no decimals because that was always a different year.

So, the primary reason for this Common Core is related to student mobility?

Well, maybe not the whole reason. But definitely one of the reasons. Different standards in different states (50+ different sets of standards) was another reason.