MCPS is cutting ELC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

And again the problem to me is not whether they’re using the ELC curriculum or adding on to CKLA — I like CKLA for what it’s worth — it’s having the separate cohort. Schools don’t want to do it as it adds expense and they want to use the gifted kids to prop up those who aren’t good readers. Ask my daughter who is always paired with a slow reader now in 3rd grade…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

And again the problem to me is not whether they’re using the ELC curriculum or adding on to CKLA — I like CKLA for what it’s worth — it’s having the separate cohort. Schools don’t want to do it as it adds expense and they want to use the gifted kids to prop up those who aren’t good readers. Ask my daughter who is always paired with a slow reader now in 3rd grade…

How does it add expense, though? In my child's ES, the kids already moved amongst the 4th and 5th grade teachers over the course of the day, including for math. If you have 100 kids, and 4 teachers, it doesn't add expense to put the kids in more homogenous rather than heterogenous ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

And again the problem to me is not whether they’re using the ELC curriculum or adding on to CKLA — I like CKLA for what it’s worth — it’s having the separate cohort. Schools don’t want to do it as it adds expense and they want to use the gifted kids to prop up those who aren’t good readers. Ask my daughter who is always paired with a slow reader now in 3rd grade…

How does it add expense, though? In my child's ES, the kids already moved amongst the 4th and 5th grade teachers over the course of the day, including for math. If you have 100 kids, and 4 teachers, it doesn't add expense to put the kids in more homogenous rather than heterogenous ones.

DP. There might be some schools who don't have enough students to form a class (who would not be able to offer the accelerated version), but you are right, for most schools, they just assign some teachers to the accelerated class and some to an on-grade level class. This is the same with compacted math. Schools have the flexibility to add some more students who are near qualifying to fill out the accelerated classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Im the parent who posted that we got into the CES next year and I would love if she could stay at her home school and be in a class with just high performing kids, but even if it were just ELC (and compacted math I guess) everything else would continue to be mixed. I hear constantly about the kids in her class who are behind and who take the attention of the teacher. The fact that all the kids will be advanced is what I’m looking forward to most.

I never thought I’d say this but I truly think we need to go back to tracking — more like the German education system…

I mean, ELC/cohorted ELA and compacted math covers the vast majority of the day, doesn't it? Besides that (and lunch, recess, and specials) there's, what, a half-hour of science or social studies and a bit of "what I need time"?

[Anonymous]

Hi I am Evelyn Chung, MCCPTA VP of Ed. I am just hopping on because it made me laugh thst someone said Chatgpt wrote the post. Yes, I am verbose and so I use ChatGPT to edit. This is because for years people asked me to write more simply so now I ask ChatGPT to simplify my emails to make them readable for PTAs. But I did provide the content and edit it. In my original emails, I note that I use ChatGPT. (I wasn’t the one to repost my email). I wish I had time to try to answer more questions but I am a volunteer and this is my weekend. But hopefully others can fill in.

[Anonymous]

This is a longer explanation I sent out to PTAs (yes also edited by ChatGPT. Not sure if people realize we are volunteers. So unless y’all want to pay me to spend hours refining my writing, you get what you get and you don’t get upset

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UdRDd4GPryg1saT0MKybqid8MZiwSKccTUkQXbXxTdk/edit?usp=drivesdk

[Anonymous]

You can verify that there is no mandatory CKLA enrichment: https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/personnel/professionallearning/. But trust me; I would know because we have been advocating for PD across the board! We don’t have money for required science training or ongoing CKLA training either 😥 MCPS has a $3 billion budget but somehow doesn’t have enough money for books, prof development or teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a longer explanation I sent out to PTAs (yes also edited by ChatGPT. Not sure if people realize we are volunteers. So unless y’all want to pay me to spend hours refining my writing, you get what you get and you don’t get upset

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UdRDd4GPryg1saT0MKybqid8MZiwSKccTUkQXbXxTdk/edit?usp=drivesdk

This is a really good explanation. Thank you for posting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

It makes no sense that they are letting schools disband the ELC class just because there is a new curriculum. The curriculum is on grade level. And while better than the previous curriculum, student ability at certain points will still be divided and should be able to be met.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

It makes no sense that they are letting schools disband the ELC class just because there is a new curriculum. The curriculum is on grade level. And while better than the previous curriculum, student ability at certain points will still be divided and should be able to be met.

Is it possible that this is just a temporary move? Maybe they want to get teachers trained in the new curriculum before they’re expected to add in enrichment?

[Anonymous]

Who cares if it was partially/written by chatGPT. We are on anonymous dcum distributing information.

[Anonymous]

You people voted for this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

It makes no sense that they are letting schools disband the ELC class just because there is a new curriculum. The curriculum is on grade level. And while better than the previous curriculum, student ability at certain points will still be divided and should be able to be met.

Is it possible that this is just a temporary move? Maybe they want to get teachers trained in the new curriculum before they’re expected to add in enrichment?

ELC is a curriculum that has been in place for many years and is offered in place of the regular curriculum for students who qualify. They would not need to train teachers on it. There is no way that what they are doing is temporary. It is to move schools away from separate classes for advanced students. That is the MCPS way. As someone said above, they would get rid of compacted math if they could. They in fact tried to a few years ago until parents were up in arms about it. And that's what parents should be doing here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

It makes no sense that they are letting schools disband the ELC class just because there is a new curriculum. The curriculum is on grade level. And while better than the previous curriculum, student ability at certain points will still be divided and should be able to be met.

Is it possible that this is just a temporary move? Maybe they want to get teachers trained in the new curriculum before they’re expected to add in enrichment?

ELC is a curriculum that has been in place for many years and is offered in place of the regular curriculum for students who qualify. They would not need to train teachers on it. There is no way that what they are doing is temporary. It is to move schools away from separate classes for advanced students. That is the MCPS way. As someone said above, they would get rid of compacted math if they could. They in fact tried to a few years ago until parents were up in arms about it. And that's what parents should be doing here.

Not offered at Viers Mill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am so so so glad we made it into the CES next year. This is a complete bait and switch for those who didn’t get into the lottery

Well that’s great for you. How is any of this fair for the kids who qualified for the CES but didn’t get a seat through the lottery. I don’t understand how MCPS justifies keeping CES. Disband them and offer enrichment at local schools.

Advocating to disband the CES isn't going to help, PP. I agree with you that all of this is unfair, and counterproductive, but I'm old enough to remember that ELC was introduced in order to redress concerns that arose after MCPS adjusted the cut-off for CES. It was introduced explicitly in response to parent outrage, which means it can be brought back the same way.

I don’t think it should be disbanded for sour grapes reasons, I just don’t see the point in it. The fact that they moved to a system that now identifies kids who qualify and then lotteries off the spots exposes that more kids qualify for the program than MCPS will provide spots for. Why? Why can’t MCPS offer an enriched curriculum to everyone who qualifies based on the criteria that they set? The solution to me is that it should be provided at the local school level for all the kids in the pool, instead of creating winners and losers arbitrarily based on a lottery, and then bussing those winners to other schools and leaving the losers with no enrichment. Why are there now essentially two systems for the same pool of kids? This makes no sense.

MCPS hasn’t always used a lottery system for admissions to the CES (or previously, for the HGC), but they have always had more students who qualified than seats for qualified students. That part isn’t new. In fact, there are fewer seats in the middle school magnets than at CES. They should expand these magnet programs or limit them to the very most advanced learners. They should not randomly select a small portion of students who are in the top half of performers for the CES and then offer no enrichment to most of the qualified students. The ways they plan to offer an enriched curriculum to students isn’t satisfactory to anyone.

Yes, I know how the prior system worked and how the current system works. I think the lottery process exposes that they do not provide access to all who qualify. They set the criteria, they identify students, and then they say sorry, no access for you to a segment of the identified students. Why do we need to expand magnets when the curriculum could be provided in the local schools? Same with the middle school magnets. Don't people want their kids to stay at their local schools but have access to the best programs MCPS has to offer? Why the gate keeping, the two tiered system, the busing kids around? Who wants this other than maybe current magnet parents who fear that somehow bringing the curriculum to the local schools will feel less special?

We already have a successful model for this with the four local CES schools. They should expand that program to any school with a large enough cohort to populate at least one classroom. If schools don't have a large enough cohort, their students should be able to attend a regional CES. I don't understand why they have not implemented this.

That is essentially what ELC was offering, and that is the model they are destroying for the next school year. MCPS had literally just finished rolling ELC (magnet level ELA curriculum) to almost every ES in the county, training teachers, helping schools figure out scheduling and then BAM, a year later they destroy it.

It makes no sense. They were on their way to the model you describe.

It makes no sense that they are letting schools disband the ELC class just because there is a new curriculum. The curriculum is on grade level. And while better than the previous curriculum, student ability at certain points will still be divided and should be able to be met.

Is it possible that this is just a temporary move? Maybe they want to get teachers trained in the new curriculum before they’re expected to add in enrichment?

ELC is a curriculum that has been in place for many years and is offered in place of the regular curriculum for students who qualify. They would not need to train teachers on it. There is no way that what they are doing is temporary. It is to move schools away from separate classes for advanced students. That is the MCPS way. As someone said above, they would get rid of compacted math if they could. They in fact tried to a few years ago until parents were up in arms about it. And that's what parents should be doing here.

Not offered at Viers Mill

Does it have an immersion program? Immersion programs don't have ELC (though English programs at those schools do have the option). If there is no immersion, and it is not offering ELC this year, then it is part of the new CKLA enrichment pilot. All other schools offer ELC.