Starr on Kojo's Show on Math Acceleration

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[Please answer the question regarding C 2.0.

1. How did the parents who decided that their child is bored in class figure out that their child had mastered the grade level C 2.0 curriculum?
2. How did the parents obtain the complete C 2.0 math curriculum to answer the question above?

It is sad that you need to stoop to derogatory terms in any response. Sure, Starr has violated your sense of entitlement but that's no reason to be obnoxious. Ever wonder why MCPS ignores parents??

Please answer - did you see math curricculum for G1-G2? Do you realy think parents cannot see if their children mastered concept of addition 1 to 20 and application of this knowelage to solve problem?

The constant evasiveness in answering the two questions above is persuasive evidence that the demand for math acceleration may be more about bragging rights and less about learning. Remember that storm over losing the GT label?

I get the GTA emails and I know there is one individual obsessed with math pathways. All the postings about math pathways may the work of one person.

One need not have seen the entire curriculum (which it should the the school's job to provide, by the way) to know that a child who has already mastered multiplication and division by 1st grade is not going to be served by the on-grade 1st grade curriculum, whatever new labels or creative methods of instruction you introduce. There are only so many ways to add 2+2. If you told me that MCPS's new way of teaching 2+2 is so new and different from what has been taught for the past 10,000 years that even someone who has already mastered two-digit multiplication would have something new to learn from it, I would be even more concerned.

Now, at higher grade levels, I could almost see it. It is perfectly possible to come up with challenging, tricky problems, problems that would stump most grownups, that do not require any math beyond 4th grade level to solve. See the problem lists for Kangaroo Math or any other math olympiad for example. But, first, these aren't really math problems so much as logic problems or creativity problems. Second, do you really think that a classroom in which the bright kids are given a string of olympiad problems while the others are learning the on-grade material is really the optimal learning environment?

It's a funny coincidence, but today my daughter came home from school with a very challenging logical puzzle. This after two months of her entire class (the 5th graders who were placed into 6th grade math, and most of whom would have been placed in 7th grade math if the school still offered such an option) being bored out of their minds. For whatever reason, they've been forced to spent this entire time reviewing material they'd learned two years ago. Well today was their lucky day. They got the puzzle. The teacher did not teach them how to solve logical puzzles. He did not do one together with them in class. He just handed them this one (more challenging than the ones I remember from the math GRE) and told them to solve it. That's it. Is this what differentiation under 2.0 will look like?

Got it!! You think that the ability to mechanically do things is a demonstration of understanding!!! That is the problem. You confuse mechanical ability, rote memorization, etc., with a deep understanding.

AS for your daughter in 5th grade--she may be doing more than what they used to do in 5th grade before. She may be learning more. A good thing, no?

Thank you for absolutely knocking this one out the park. Its clear to me that many not all but many of these posters just want acceleration for accelerations sake.

My daughter is in K, can read at a very high level, does higher level math calculations with ease. She can perform at a high level if tested on the former. However, I in no way wish to have her accelerated needlessly to more complex material because its clear that her comprehension level in reading and understanding of the what the math calculations she's performing mean are not what the execution of these tasks would make one assume.

She is at the top of her class but there are very FEW who do have the full understanding of these concepts at this stage of the game. It is a mistake to accelerate kids at the percentages I've seen previously because there is no way that # of kids is ready.

[Anonymous]

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

The name calling poster has decided that his/her child is gifted. Now, if what is said is true, MCPS should offer appropriate services. The funny thing is all these gifted children only want math acceleration. Wonder why?

[Anonymous]

This guy seems to have sensible ideas and synthesizes the data well.
http://www.examiner.com/article/academically-gifted-students-need-an-express-lane-with-an-acceleration-policy
http://www.examiner.com/article/gifted-and-talented-education-montgomery-county-public-schools
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-framework-for-independent-learning-montgomery-county-public-schools

We need more like him who understand gifted education in MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[Please answer the question regarding C 2.0.

1. How did the parents who decided that their child is bored in class figure out that their child had mastered the grade level C 2.0 curriculum?
2. How did the parents obtain the complete C 2.0 math curriculum to answer the question above?

It is sad that you need to stoop to derogatory terms in any response. Sure, Starr has violated your sense of entitlement but that's no reason to be obnoxious. Ever wonder why MCPS ignores parents??

Please answer - did you see math curricculum for G1-G2? Do you realy think parents cannot see if their children mastered concept of addition 1 to 20 and application of this knowelage to solve problem?

The constant evasiveness in answering the two questions above is persuasive evidence that the demand for math acceleration may be more about bragging rights and less about learning. Remember that storm over losing the GT label?

I get the GTA emails and I know there is one individual obsessed with math pathways. All the postings about math pathways may the work of one person.

One need not have seen the entire curriculum (which it should the the school's job to provide, by the way) to know that a child who has already mastered multiplication and division by 1st grade is not going to be served by the on-grade 1st grade curriculum, whatever new labels or creative methods of instruction you introduce. There are only so many ways to add 2+2. If you told me that MCPS's new way of teaching 2+2 is so new and different from what has been taught for the past 10,000 years that even someone who has already mastered two-digit multiplication would have something new to learn from it, I would be even more concerned.

Now, at higher grade levels, I could almost see it. It is perfectly possible to come up with challenging, tricky problems, problems that would stump most grownups, that do not require any math beyond 4th grade level to solve. See the problem lists for Kangaroo Math or any other math olympiad for example. But, first, these aren't really math problems so much as logic problems or creativity problems. Second, do you really think that a classroom in which the bright kids are given a string of olympiad problems while the others are learning the on-grade material is really the optimal learning environment?

It's a funny coincidence, but today my daughter came home from school with a very challenging logical puzzle. This after two months of her entire class (the 5th graders who were placed into 6th grade math, and most of whom would have been placed in 7th grade math if the school still offered such an option) being bored out of their minds. For whatever reason, they've been forced to spent this entire time reviewing material they'd learned two years ago. Well today was their lucky day. They got the puzzle. The teacher did not teach them how to solve logical puzzles. He did not do one together with them in class. He just handed them this one (more challenging than the ones I remember from the math GRE) and told them to solve it. That's it. Is this what differentiation under 2.0 will look like?

Got it!! You think that the ability to mechanically do things is a demonstration of understanding!!! That is the problem. You confuse mechanical ability, rote memorization, etc., with a deep understanding.

AS for your daughter in 5th grade--she may be doing more than what they used to do in 5th grade before. She may be learning more. A good thing, no?

Thank you for absolutely knocking this one out the park. Its clear to me that many not all but many of these posters just want acceleration for accelerations sake.

My daughter is in K, can read at a very high level, does higher level math calculations with ease. She can perform at a high level if tested on the former. However, I in no way wish to have her accelerated needlessly to more complex material because its clear that her comprehension level in reading and understanding of the what the math calculations she's performing mean are not what the execution of these tasks would make one assume.

She is at the top of her class but there are very FEW who do have the full understanding of these concepts at this stage of the game. It is a mistake to accelerate kids at the percentages I've seen previously because there is no way that # of kids is ready.

I agree with you that way too many kids were being accelerated in the past. We hear stories of kids needing tutors in order to keep up with "advanced" math in elementary school. I think reasonable people would agree, that's wrong and not good for kids.

However, the problem I have is that while that over-acceleration problem needed correcting, MPCS seems to have taken a similarly over-broad approach with 2.0 (by stopping acceleration across the board). Surely, some of the kids who received acceleration in the past could benefit from some acceleration (or maybe from differentiated classrooms of similarly skilled learners within their grade level) or some other creative solution. Instead, by abruptly stopping acceleration, having those accelerated kids repeat material all year, and having all skill levels in the same class room, etc. MCPS appears to demonstrate the same all or nothing approach that was a problem in over acceleration.

I would feel better about this new curriculum if there were some coherent statement/process about assessing kids and making sure that they are not languishing under 2.0. I fear that in a few years, MCPS will decry the lack of acceleration and differentiation under 2.0 as a big problem that must be solved by some altogether new program. Let's not lose these kids.

[Anonymous]

Here's another side of this argument. DD worked ahead all throughout ES (was in 6th grade math in 5th grade and so on). She really wanted to go into IM in 6th grade and, after talking to her teacher, we decided to let her do it.

So now she's struggling -- not a lot, but she's a B/C student instead of an A student. We will probably move her back to Math 7.

I wish there had been an objective way for us to identify where she should be placed. We wanted her to stretch and feel challenged but not at the expense of basic learning. But there was no threshhold -- just subjective opinions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

Is the drive not worth it for your kid's education? I think I would try to make it work if I could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This guy seems to have sensible ideas and synthesizes the data well.
http://www.examiner.com/article/academically-gifted-students-need-an-express-lane-with-an-acceleration-policy
http://www.examiner.com/article/gifted-and-talented-education-montgomery-county-public-schools
http://www.examiner.com/article/a-framework-for-independent-learning-montgomery-county-public-schools

We need more like him who understand gifted education in MCPS.

+1
How do we go about accomplishing these things?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here's another side of this argument. DD worked ahead all throughout ES (was in 6th grade math in 5th grade and so on). She really wanted to go into IM in 6th grade and, after talking to her teacher, we decided to let her do it.

So now she's struggling -- not a lot, but she's a B/C student instead of an A student. We will probably move her back to Math 7.

I wish there had been an objective way for us to identify where she should be placed. We wanted her to stretch and feel challenged but not at the expense of basic learning. But there was no threshhold -- just subjective opinions.

There are objective ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

Is the drive not worth it for your kid's education? I think I would try to make it work if I could.

It is simply a factual observation: some children are over an hour away. This isn't relative to my kids b/c of their ages. That said, for a family dealing with a chronically ill child, cancer, job loss, financial issues, etc., yes I can certainly imagine a family deciding that adding a 1 hour commute for the child on top of all that would be too much. Life isn't always black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

Is the drive not worth it for your kid's education? I think I would try to make it work if I could.

It is simply a factual observation: some children are over an hour away. This isn't relative to my kids b/c of their ages. That said, for a family dealing with a chronically ill child, cancer, job loss, financial issues, etc., yes I can certainly imagine a family deciding that adding a 1 hour commute for the child on top of all that would be too much. Life isn't always black and white.

None of this really answers the original question as to why such a gifted child would not be at a magnet. The poster complained that the child should be accelerated and had the testing done on the child. I thought perhaps magnets might be an option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

Is the drive not worth it for your kid's education? I think I would try to make it work if I could.

It is simply a factual observation: some children are over an hour away. This isn't relative to my kids b/c of their ages. That said, for a family dealing with a chronically ill child, cancer, job loss, financial issues, etc., yes I can certainly imagine a family deciding that adding a 1 hour commute for the child on top of all that would be too much. Life isn't always black and white.

None of this really answers the original question as to why such a gifted child would not be at a magnet. The poster complained that the child should be accelerated and had the testing done on the child. I thought perhaps magnets might be an option.

It's simple - not enought resourses.
Magnet schools can accomodate 2-3% of the kids, while statistically, 35-40% of all children in MoCo were tested as gifted.
So, we're talking about 1/3 of the children in the county without proper accomodation.

[Anonymous]

If 35-40% tested as gifted then they need to redefine what is "gifted". LOL, 40% are gifted... Living in lake woebegone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

ES magnets are not +1 hour away from ANYONE in the county.

You are wrong. Factor in traffic, you have more than 1 hour.

Is the drive not worth it for your kid's education? I think I would try to make it work if I could.

It is simply a factual observation: some children are over an hour away. This isn't relative to my kids b/c of their ages. That said, for a family dealing with a chronically ill child, cancer, job loss, financial issues, etc., yes I can certainly imagine a family deciding that adding a 1 hour commute for the child on top of all that would be too much. Life isn't always black and white.

None of this really answers the original question as to why such a gifted child would not be at a magnet. The poster complained that the child should be accelerated and had the testing done on the child. I thought perhaps magnets might be an option.

It's simple - not enought resourses.
Magnet schools can accomodate 2-3% of the kids, while statistically, 35-40% of all children in MoCo were tested as gifted.
So, we're talking about 1/3 of the children in the county without proper accomodation.

Does it seem weird to anyone that 40% of kids are considered gifted? That seems so high. Is this just an exception area or have they set the bar too low? I'm curious.