Are middle schools and high schools impacted by 2.0?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have looked at the MCPS website re 2.0. They don't mention anything about how they plan to incorporate common core standards at the higher grade levels--but I know they are planning to do so. It's a real shame. Parents need to wake up and make a fuss like they did in NY--if we don't, they'll mess up middle school and high school the way they have for elementary school! These standards are a joke and so is the new technology plan.

Which Common Core standards do you think are a joke, and why do you think so?

Obama put forth common core because he wanted every state to have the same standards. Then he bribed states with money the first couple years if they signed up.
If Maryland had very high state standards before and Mississippi had very low standards, now they don't. They have the same mediocre Obama education dept standards now. (Which costs millions to reinvent of course).
Each state that signed up for the money, err, standards, has come up with its implementation plan and teaching curriculum. THIS is what MoCo and Maryland really F'd up. The implementation.
Plus it lowered its standards in several mcps schools. But nevermind that, it needs to cater more to the ESOL and poverty kids. Who cares about the middle class, they can just keep paying their ever-rising porosity taxes for more ESOL teachers, farm lunches, and teachers aides for disruptive classes. They can teach their kid themselves or let them wallow in repetition, proficiency, experimental teaching methods, and botched instruction.

That's interesting. You didn't answer the question.

(Also, Obama did not put forth the Common Core standards. They come from the states: the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 2002 paper was responding to when GT was done in-home school. There was or still is an active campaign by MCEF to end gifted labeling and gifted centers.

Its very naive to pretend that the perspective to end GT centers and magnets because they predominantly only serve one segment of the population that is already privileged isn't strong within Montgomery County.

I wouldn't believe that anything is impossible. No one who moved Montgomery for the strong math curriculum ever expected MCPS to gut it as quickly as they did with 2.0. Boundary changes and busing is next to impossible because it involves a host of other parties from transportation to business developers. GT centers? Stroke of pen and they're gone.

Except that nobody will ever do that stroke of a pen, because they know that it would be followed by deafening roars of outrage from many of the most affluent, entitled parents in Montgomery County (and the competition for that category in Montgomery County is stiff). Raising fears that Starr will abolish the HGCs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11! is useful if your goal is to rally the affluent parents. It's not so useful if your goal is to actually improve education in MCPS.

I really don't understand how getting rid of HGCs would improve the education in MCPS. It is taking out a program that offers a more rigorous curriculum. How does eliminating HGCs exactly help improve the education overall? By steering the funds elsewhere? Well, if that is the case, then shouldn't we get rid of IEP programs, too, for the wealthy because they can surely afford private instruction.

There has been a lot of evidence that suggests increasing spending for a lower SES child doesn't improves academics. Title 1 schools receive extra funding, smaller class sizes. I'm not arguing against it. I think it's good they have it. But how much of an increase in scores has it generated?

Also, as another PP noted, the only ones to really suffer are those from middle class families.

That's because it wouldn't.

Also, it's not going to happen.

But if you want to get affluent, well-educated people to shake their fists at Joshua Starr, one way to achieve that goal is to tell them "Starr wants to abolish the HGCs!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have looked at the MCPS website re 2.0. They don't mention anything about how they plan to incorporate common core standards at the higher grade levels--but I know they are planning to do so. It's a real shame. Parents need to wake up and make a fuss like they did in NY--if we don't, they'll mess up middle school and high school the way they have for elementary school! These standards are a joke and so is the new technology plan.

Which Common Core standards do you think are a joke, and why do you think so?

Obama put forth common core because he wanted every state to have the same standards. Then he bribed states with money the first couple years if they signed up.
If Maryland had very high state standards before and Mississippi had very low standards, now they don't. They have the same mediocre Obama education dept standards now. (Which costs millions to reinvent of course).
Each state that signed up for the money, err, standards, has come up with its implementation plan and teaching curriculum. THIS is what MoCo and Maryland really F'd up. The implementation.
Plus it lowered its standards in several mcps schools. But nevermind that, it needs to cater more to the ESOL and poverty kids. Who cares about the middle class, they can just keep paying their ever-rising porosity taxes for more ESOL teachers, farm lunches, and teachers aides for disruptive classes. They can teach their kid themselves or let them wallow in repetition, proficiency, experimental teaching methods, and botched instruction.

That's interesting. You didn't answer the question.

(Also, Obama did not put forth the Common Core standards. They come from the states: the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).)

It is amazing to me that people who seem to have such a hatred towards CC seem to know very little about it other than the perceived "dumbing down" of standards. Obama had *nothing* to do with the standards. But I agree, the implementation of 2.0 hasn't been very good, however, some of 2.0 (or CC) standards are actually raising the standards across the board.

[Anonymous]

I think MCPS is already backing away from HGC and magnet support. Our former elementary school is one of the top scoring schools in the county yet I heard that only 1 3rd grader was accepted to the HGC program this year. Its not that the kids didn't score high enough but that there are so many more kids in our cluster that qualify now that the competition is much higher. HGC was a wonderful program and I'm happy that my child was able to go. If he was several years younger, he probably would not have gotten in.

For the kids that need this type of program and can work at that level with peers, its really a shame that MCPS stopped growing the program. I wouldn't advocate for lowing the standard but if they see a growing trend in students who qualify they should open more centers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think MCPS is already backing away from HGC and magnet support. Our former elementary school is one of the top scoring schools in the county yet I heard that only 1 3rd grader was accepted to the HGC program this year. Its not that the kids didn't score high enough but that there are so many more kids in our cluster that qualify now that the competition is much higher. HGC was a wonderful program and I'm happy that my child was able to go. If he was several years younger, he probably would not have gotten in.

For the kids that need this type of program and can work at that level with peers, its really a shame that MCPS stopped growing the program. I wouldn't advocate for lowing the standard but if they see a growing trend in students who qualify they should open more centers.

You think that MCPS is backing away from HGC and magnet support, based on you having heard that only one third-grader from your former elementary school was accepted into the HGC program?

[Anonymous]

I thought that when there were many high scorers at a school they were less likely to pull kids for the magnet because they have a peer group at the home school and can be accomodated there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought that when there were many high scorers at a school they were less likely to pull kids for the magnet because they have a peer group at the home school and can be accomodated there.

+1 this is why you don't have as many kids from "W" schools applying or accepting spots at the middle school magnets in particular.

[Anonymous]

So how can 'gifted' children or children who quickly master material be better supported in their home schools -- in spite of 2.0?

I keep hearing conflicting things about 2.0--ranging from how convoluted it is to how it's supposed to allow for different levels of learning. Is this happening? Do teachers need to be better trained? Should outside material be brought in? Is there such a thing as an honors track for middle school courses? Sorry for all the questions!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought that when there were many high scorers at a school they were less likely to pull kids for the magnet because they have a peer group at the home school and can be accomodated there.

+1 this is why you don't have as many kids from "W" schools applying or accepting spots at the middle school magnets in particular.

Well, that, plus the long commute to schools that those people go to.

To be fair, people in Bethesda/Potomac are not the only ones who don't want to send their children to schools that those people go to. I also know people in the upcounty who did not let their children apply to the middle school magnet programs because they're at Roberto Clemente MS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought that when there were many high scorers at a school they were less likely to pull kids for the magnet because they have a peer group at the home school and can be accomodated there.

On the HGC application, one of the questions gets at whether your child's needs are being met. I think that this is an important factor.

[Anonymous]

So how can 'gifted' children or children who quickly master material be better supported in their home schools -- in spite of 2.0?

You have to seek outside instruction and activities. Our school pays lots of lip service to acceleration and enrichment in 2.0 but its non-existent and a joke. The 2.0 writing are open enough that a kid could do more but the teachers only teach to the "proficient" expectations. There is absolutely no feedback and guidance on improving your writing if you've already hit the magic P of mediocre work. Since most of the work is done in class and there is no writing composition homework you can't really supplement at home by guiding your child to improve their writing either.

For writing, you can look for writing workshops or even just writing based projects and assignments on the web. For math, there are math classes offered by Kumon, Mathnasium, private tutors, Singapore books are available at Amazon, IXL is an on-line program that offers practice exercises, Khan academy etc. Johns Hopkins has a talented youth on-line program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which Common Core standards do you think are a joke, and why do you think so?

[Excellent summary of the federal politics behind CC]

That's interesting. You didn't answer the question. [...]

I don't know what the earlier poster had in mind, but here is one (jokish CC standard):
"Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others." (from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Core_State_Standards_Initiative#Mathematics_standards).
Sounds good, right? No, because this was already done, but correctly, in Curriculum 1.0. It was called a PROOF. Mathematics is a language, and within that language conclusions are justified using proofs. The reasoning of another is critiqued by identifying an error at some step of his/her proof. Replacing that with "write a paragraph explaining why Frank's answer is correct" is a huge step backwards (not to mention a nightmare for the teacher who has to decide how much partial credit to give for not-quite-coherent answers).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which Common Core standards do you think are a joke, and why do you think so?

[Excellent summary of the federal politics behind CC]

That's interesting. You didn't answer the question. [...]

I don't know what the earlier poster had in mind, but here is one (jokish CC standard):
"Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others." (from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Core_State_Standards_Initiative#Mathematics_standards).
Sounds good, right? No, because this was already done, but correctly, in Curriculum 1.0. It was called a PROOF. Mathematics is a language, and within that language conclusions are justified using proofs. The reasoning of another is critiqued by identifying an error at some step of his/her proof. Replacing that with "write a paragraph explaining why Frank's answer is correct" is a huge step backwards (not to mention a nightmare for the teacher who has to decide how much partial credit to give for not-quite-coherent answers).

This is not a standard. This is one of the math practices underlying the individual math standards, along with "Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them" and "Reason abstractly and quantitatively". Do you disagree with these principles? It sounds like you agree with them.

Also, you really don't have to refer to Wikipedia to find out what the Common Core standards are. You can go directly to the source, here: http://www.corestandards.org/Math/

[Anonymous]

On a happy note: Ninth grader just brought home a really interesting looking vocab builder book, with lots of word origin info and fun exercises. Looks pretty rigorous in terms of vocabulary but not at all dry, and great practice for SAT. Emblazoned on the top was "Common Core Standards Compatible" or something like that.

[Anonymous]

This is not a standard. This is one of the math practices underlying the individual math standards, along with "Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them" and "Reason abstractly and quantitatively". Do you disagree with these principles? It sounds like you agree with them.

What the previous poster is pointing out is that a traditional "PROOF" does exactly this. Identifying the error state and providing a mathematical proof is a far more accurate and correct manner to express understanding and mastery of the concept. It also builds the foundation for higher level math.

Translating this into words and paragraph form to provide a written, english assignment type response to explain your reasoning is beyond ridiculous and flat out wrong. MCPS has embraced this idea that math needs to become a verbal art form to the point where they are now teaching kids incorrect concepts and accepting wrong answers. There is a reason why math developed a different set of symbols, numbers and equations to express the concepts instead of just using oral and written verbiage!! Its not only cumbersome but translating mathematical concepts into english prose often yields the wrong result. We see this again and again on all the poorly worded word problems from MCPS. Now, they are teaching the students to screw up math.