MCPS curriculum RFP-Second Attempt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As much as people complain and want to scare off people from MoCo schools, I am highly optimistic about the new curriculum. Here’s why: 1) MoCo is the only school district in the area to periodically review its curriculum to see if its working 2) They has Johns Hopkins a well regarded school to give an independent analysis and not just the MoCo Board is Education or its Central Office. 3) When MCPS heard of its former personnel worker being a leak for Discovery, they immediately shut it down and started over for ethics concern.

Is that what happened? MCPS (Ms. Navarro) went out of their way to praise Discovery Education and absolve them of any wrongdoing. And Erick Lang and another colleague now work for Discovery Education, so presumably Discovery doesn't think they did anything wrong.

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:that's weird she says the RFP was issued on August 20th, I checked the website 3 days ago, and nothing had been updated.

Why is it weird? They re-issued the RFP on August 20, now they've sent out an e-mail, and presumably at some point they will update the website.

The website is updated now, but I had thought they would update it along with issuing the RFP. I guess they issue it elsewhere.

Well, the email from MCPS did say to check the websites for the latest updates. If they issued the RFP on August 20 and didn't update the website til a few days later, that's not consistent with what they promised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As much as people complain and want to scare off people from MoCo schools, I am highly optimistic about the new curriculum. Here’s why: 1) MoCo is the only school district in the area to periodically review its curriculum to see if its working 2) They has Johns Hopkins a well regarded school to give an independent analysis and not just the MoCo Board is Education or its Central Office. 3) When MCPS heard of its former personnel worker being a leak for Discovery, they immediately shut it down and started over for ethics concern.

Re your third point - I’d feel that way only if discovery were not allowed to bid this time around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:that's weird she says the RFP was issued on August 20th, I checked the website 3 days ago, and nothing had been updated.

Why is it weird? They re-issued the RFP on August 20, now they've sent out an e-mail, and presumably at some point they will update the website.

The website is updated now, but I had thought they would update it along with issuing the RFP. I guess they issue it elsewhere.

Well, the email from MCPS did say to check the websites for the latest updates. If they issued the RFP on August 20 and didn't update the website til a few days later, that's not consistent with what they promised.

Sometimes I get the feeling that if MCPS were a pizzeria, and DCUM ordered a pizza with olives, there would be at least 5 threads per month about how MCPS is the worst pizzeria in the world because the olives ought to be oil-cured but instead were Kalamata. DCUM would also complain that:

1. a large pizza ought to be 16 inches instead of 14.
2. a large pizza ought to be 14 inches instead of 16.
3. the diameter of the pizza ought to be measured in centimeters instead of inches.
4. a large pizza shouldn't be one-size-fits-all; there should be different sizes of large pizzas for different people with different needs.

Also, of course, pizzas from the east county are gang pizzas, and downcounty people should be able to get the pizzas they're entitled to even when the roads in the upcounty are icy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:that's weird she says the RFP was issued on August 20th, I checked the website 3 days ago, and nothing had been updated.

Why is it weird? They re-issued the RFP on August 20, now they've sent out an e-mail, and presumably at some point they will update the website.

The website is updated now, but I had thought they would update it along with issuing the RFP. I guess they issue it elsewhere.

Well, the email from MCPS did say to check the websites for the latest updates. If they issued the RFP on August 20 and didn't update the website til a few days later, that's not consistent with what they promised.

Sometimes I get the feeling that if MCPS were a pizzeria, and DCUM ordered a pizza with olives, there would be at least 5 threads per month about how MCPS is the worst pizzeria in the world because the olives ought to be oil-cured but instead were Kalamata. DCUM would also complain that:

1. a large pizza ought to be 16 inches instead of 14.
2. a large pizza ought to be 14 inches instead of 16.
3. the diameter of the pizza ought to be measured in centimeters instead of inches.
4. a large pizza shouldn't be one-size-fits-all; there should be different sizes of large pizzas for different people with different needs.

Also, of course, pizzas from the east county are gang pizzas, and downcounty people should be able to get the pizzas they're entitled to even when the roads in the upcounty are icy.

Have you considered the needs of lactose intolerant students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:that's weird she says the RFP was issued on August 20th, I checked the website 3 days ago, and nothing had been updated.

Why is it weird? They re-issued the RFP on August 20, now they've sent out an e-mail, and presumably at some point they will update the website.

The website is updated now, but I had thought they would update it along with issuing the RFP. I guess they issue it elsewhere.

Well, the email from MCPS did say to check the websites for the latest updates. If they issued the RFP on August 20 and didn't update the website til a few days later, that's not consistent with what they promised.

Sometimes I get the feeling that if MCPS were a pizzeria, and DCUM ordered a pizza with olives, there would be at least 5 threads per month about how MCPS is the worst pizzeria in the world because the olives ought to be oil-cured but instead were Kalamata. DCUM would also complain that:

1. a large pizza ought to be 16 inches instead of 14.
2. a large pizza ought to be 14 inches instead of 16.
3. the diameter of the pizza ought to be measured in centimeters instead of inches.
4. a large pizza shouldn't be one-size-fits-all; there should be different sizes of large pizzas for different people with different needs.

Also, of course, pizzas from the east county are gang pizzas, and downcounty people should be able to get the pizzas they're entitled to even when the roads in the upcounty are icy.

THIS +100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:that's weird she says the RFP was issued on August 20th, I checked the website 3 days ago, and nothing had been updated.

Why is it weird? They re-issued the RFP on August 20, now they've sent out an e-mail, and presumably at some point they will update the website.

The website is updated now, but I had thought they would update it along with issuing the RFP. I guess they issue it elsewhere.

Well, the email from MCPS did say to check the websites for the latest updates. If they issued the RFP on August 20 and didn't update the website til a few days later, that's not consistent with what they promised.

Sometimes I get the feeling that if MCPS were a pizzeria, and DCUM ordered a pizza with olives, there would be at least 5 threads per month about how MCPS is the worst pizzeria in the world because the olives ought to be oil-cured but instead were Kalamata. DCUM would also complain that:

1. a large pizza ought to be 16 inches instead of 14.
2. a large pizza ought to be 14 inches instead of 16.
3. the diameter of the pizza ought to be measured in centimeters instead of inches.
4. a large pizza shouldn't be one-size-fits-all; there should be different sizes of large pizzas for different people with different needs.

Also, of course, pizzas from the east county are gang pizzas, and downcounty people should be able to get the pizzas they're entitled to even when the roads in the upcounty are icy.

No, we just want MCPS to adhere to what they promised. They're really sloppy with communications. (Even the responses I get as a parent from askMCPS are riddled with bad writing and obvious typos, which scares me because these are the people teaching my kid.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As much as people complain and want to scare off people from MoCo schools, I am highly optimistic about the new curriculum. Here’s why: 1) MoCo is the only school district in the area to periodically review its curriculum to see if its working 2) They has Johns Hopkins a well regarded school to give an independent analysis and not just the MoCo Board is Education or its Central Office. 3) When MCPS heard of its former personnel worker being a leak for Discovery, they immediately shut it down and started over for ethics concern.

Re your third point - I’d feel that way only if discovery were not allowed to bid this time around.

+1 That's a good question for people to put in their "survey" on questions parents have that they included in the email update today.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please share this with any good curriculum providers
http://procurement.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/home/Bid_Record/1638

+1

[Anonymous]

MCPS teacher here, I’d like to see a math curriculum specifically for enrichment and acceleration. Meeting the needs of elementary students is difficult because there a different levels of gifted ness. 1)Some students learn concepts quickly, are curious learners and demonstrate persistence even when learning is tough 2) There are students who are uniquely highly gifted and need not just enrichment acceleration so that they are not bored. 3) Complex math problems are tough and require a deeper foundational study of the “how”, “why” and “when” for applying algothms and strategies. 4) I don’t want to see little Larlo/Larla in the enriched/acceleration group when they are missing foundational skills.

[Anonymous]

I’m the PP, forgot to mention Project M3 does a wonderful job of enrichment and acceleration. I’m going to suggest this on my survey. http://aea11gt.pbworks.com/f/Project+M3+Sampler.pdf

[Anonymous]

Please fill out the survey people!! Please!

Ask for a well-proven curriculum with less reliance on Chromebooks for the younger grades. Ask for well-organized materials. (If that is what you want)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please fill out the survey people!! Please!

Ask for a well-proven curriculum with less reliance on Chromebooks for the younger grades. Ask for well-organized materials. (If that is what you want)

Just filled it out. I asked for less reliance on Chromebooks, a process that favors high quality curricula like Singapore Math over Discovery, and the provision of dedicated science and social studies (I know the last one isn’t part of this curriculum review, but we have to hold their feet to the fire on it because it’s not enough to fix 2 subjects. Kids need all the core subjects).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please fill out the survey people!! Please!

Ask for a well-proven curriculum with less reliance on Chromebooks for the younger grades. Ask for well-organized materials. (If that is what you want)

+1 This is an opportunity to add your voice instead of complaining constantly on an anonymous forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please fill out the survey people!! Please!

Ask for a well-proven curriculum with less reliance on Chromebooks for the younger grades. Ask for well-organized materials. (If that is what you want)

+1 This is an opportunity to add your voice instead of complaining constantly on an anonymous forum.

+1. I am asking how they will place a priority on evidence of effectiveness and positive track record in other jurisdictions. And also about how they will ensure that Discovery doesn’t receive unfair benefits due to the cluster of former McPS curriculum staff in its organization.