FCPS Early Release Mondays

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


Oh I love when parents like to act like experts in education...this is laughable.


And I love when teachers who are just a few years out of college and don't have kids of their own tell those of us who have been parenting for many years (and have been to several different schools and seen several different systems) that we know nothing.


LOL
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have
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:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have


What are you stammering on about?

Parental input is important regarding what parents observe at home, but most parents are not professional educators, so their input regarding appropriate scaffolds and supports is irrelevant. Trust the professionals regarding pedagogy and methodology.

Lucy Calkins was a curriculum. It had nothing to do with parental input.
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:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have


It is not “parental disdain” to say if you are not an educator you are not trained or qualified to be able to speak on things like how to address difficulty reading and who qualifies for special education or not. Your input as a layperson simply does not equate to the person who is trained in this field. We have got to stop implying or believing that simply being a parent renders one highly qualified in the field of education.
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:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have


It is not “parental disdain” to say if you are not an educator you are not trained or qualified to be able to speak on things like how to address difficulty reading and who qualifies for special education or not. Your input as a layperson simply does not equate to the person who is trained in this field. We have got to stop implying or believing that simply being a parent renders one highly qualified in the field of education.


Parents are not “laypeople” about their children’s needs. Attitudes like this— and yes, it’s disdain— is why FCPS wound up paying out so much money for failing kids with learning disabilities during and after COVID. And their parents, in addition to their real jobs, got the pleasure of fighting the school for the education their kids were entitled to.

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:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have


It is not “parental disdain” to say if you are not an educator you are not trained or qualified to be able to speak on things like how to address difficulty reading and who qualifies for special education or not. Your input as a layperson simply does not equate to the person who is trained in this field. We have got to stop implying or believing that simply being a parent renders one highly qualified in the field of education.


Parents are not “laypeople” about their children’s needs. Attitudes like this— and yes, it’s disdain— is why FCPS wound up paying out so much money for failing kids with learning disabilities during and after COVID. And their parents, in addition to their real jobs, got the pleasure of fighting the school for the education their kids were entitled to.



Many parents are “laypeople.” In my 20 years of teachers I been asked the following questions, and so many more:
- How do I get my kid to follow the rules?
- How do I wake up my kid for school?
- Should I remind my student to do their homework?
- How do I get my kid to eat breakfast, wear deodorant, shower, etc?
- What do I do when my kid talks back (or doesn’t listen) to me?
- Can you recommend a parenting book or class?
Anonymous
The parent/teacher divide within FCPS is wide and bitter from all sides, not to mention snarky. I don’t know how FCPS can ever be more successful as a system with this animosity.
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:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How did we all learn to read without all this extra training for our teachers?


For one, your teachers taught you phonics and for two, you didn’t have screens rotting your brain.


1) Screens are not going to be solved by early release workdays. In fact, this new training will probably lead to kids doing more Lexia on screens since that is meant to teach phonics.
2) Phonics are only meant to be taught up to 2nd grade by general ed teachers. There is no need to teach 5th grade teachers how to teach the difference between Rot and Rote.


VLA is through eighth grade and is about far more than phonics.

Additionally, do you think fifth grade teachers should just give up on kids who didn't learn phonics by second grade?


Those kids that are still struggling with reading in 5th grade should be in special Ed.


This is why it’s so laughable that so many of you feel qualified to say what schools should or should not be doing. Just a bozo every which way.


You seem to miss my point. Kids who can’t actually read by 5th grade have problems. They would have been weeded out to a trade school in Europe at this point. They should be weeded out but they aren’t. But seriously, it a child can’t read by 5th grade that is grounds for special ed. This is why so many parents want AAP.



Most of the kids who struggle with reading in 5th are ESL or SPED or dually identified.


Yes, I would hope so. To just have a kid who can’t read without any support in 5th would be very odd.


Very, very few kids are in 5th grade who truly “can’t read” as in, can’t sound out words or decode OR comprehend. People use “can’t read” to describe a wide spectrum of difficulty reading, from stamina to prosody to comprehension to spelling. A lot of kids struggle in one or more of these areas but technically can read, and their reading difficulty does NOT (nor should it) automatically qualify them for special education. It may necessitate pull out support with a reading specialist and small group support in their classroom, but it is not in and of itself a sign a student has a disability to the degree that they meet the standards of being eligible for special education.


Exactly! Parents don’t understand the different issues with “can’t read.” They also don’t understand that there are many options for extra support besides special education. They also don’t understand what special education means (eligibility criteria and least restrictive environment per law).

Still, it is a good thing that FCPS is following evidence based practice to revamp reading instruction consistently for all teachers.


This kind of disdain for parental input and discounting of what parents are seeing lead to Lucy Calkins lasting for years longer than it should have


It is not “parental disdain” to say if you are not an educator you are not trained or qualified to be able to speak on things like how to address difficulty reading and who qualifies for special education or not. Your input as a layperson simply does not equate to the person who is trained in this field. We have got to stop implying or believing that simply being a parent renders one highly qualified in the field of education.


Parents are not “laypeople” about their children’s needs. Attitudes like this— and yes, it’s disdain— is why FCPS wound up paying out so much money for failing kids with learning disabilities during and after COVID. And their parents, in addition to their real jobs, got the pleasure of fighting the school for the education their kids were entitled to.



Incorrect again. COVID is why FCPS had to pay for failing kids due to COVID. Not “disdain.” Furthermore, YOU may be knowledgeable about YOUR kids’ needs but you are not broadly knowledgeable about how to education children with many different needs and the ways to do so. Because you are not an educator with years or decades of experience working with thousands of children in a school setting , nor are you someone with advanced degrees in education, child development, or a specific content area that you teach.

I know you want to believe that becoming a parent somehow imbued you with exactly the same level of experience and expertise a teacher has in the area of teaching. It did not. That isn’t disdain, that’s just fact.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The parent/teacher divide within FCPS is wide and bitter from all sides, not to mention snarky. I don’t know how FCPS can ever be more successful as a system with this animosity.


The issue that I see is that parents want what is best for their child. However, we teachers simply cannot provide anything approaching this. We can only provide the very basics. There are too many children and many of the children are coming to school unprepared.

One way to help parents understand this is to think about school lunch. Consider the nutrition and quality of the food offered. What the exception of a few years during the Obama presidency, the food is low nutrition and at best low-medium quality. The fresh fruit is a small and mealy red delicious apple. The pizza is full of sugar. Chocolate milk is the exception.

Breakfast is almost entirely without a source of protein. The food the children are served by the school is safe and will keep them alive. It’s essentially prison-level quality food. It is not what an involved parent who cares about the nutrition of their child would choose for them. The child that comes to school with a packed and nutritious lunch from home will be miles ahead in nutrition than their peers who are eating the school lunch.

It is the same with what occurs in the classroom. The child that has had plenty of reading and enrichment at home will come to school miles ahead of the student who has gotten all of their education from FCPS. The child that has outside tutoring will master the concepts while the child that only had exposure during the school day will only have a rough appreciation for what was taught.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The parent/teacher divide within FCPS is wide and bitter from all sides, not to mention snarky. I don’t know how FCPS can ever be more successful as a system with this animosity.


The issue that I see is that parents want what is best for their child. However, we teachers simply cannot provide anything approaching this. We can only provide the very basics. There are too many children and many of the children are coming to school unprepared.

One way to help parents understand this is to think about school lunch. Consider the nutrition and quality of the food offered. What the exception of a few years during the Obama presidency, the food is low nutrition and at best low-medium quality. The fresh fruit is a small and mealy red delicious apple. The pizza is full of sugar. Chocolate milk is the exception.

Breakfast is almost entirely without a source of protein. The food the children are served by the school is safe and will keep them alive. It’s essentially prison-level quality food. It is not what an involved parent who cares about the nutrition of their child would choose for them. The child that comes to school with a packed and nutritious lunch from home will be miles ahead in nutrition than their peers who are eating the school lunch.

It is the same with what occurs in the classroom. The child that has had plenty of reading and enrichment at home will come to school miles ahead of the student who has gotten all of their education from FCPS. The child that has outside tutoring will master the concepts while the child that only had exposure during the school day will only have a rough appreciation for what was taught.


Continuing

The faster parents who care about education realize this hard truth, the quicker the anger will go away. Do not expect FCPS to provide what is impossible for them to execute. Teachers are doing their best, but we cannot do more than the basics.

Early release Mondays should be seen as an opportunity for you to educate your child. Book tutoring or plan an educational outing. This is what your child deserves from you as their parent. Embrace this mindset and the anger goes away.
Anonymous
Most parents who post here want the qualities and privileges that come with a small private school education at their giant FCPS public and will never accept that that isn’t going to happen.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Most parents who post here want the qualities and privileges that come with a small private school education at their giant FCPS public and will never accept that that isn’t going to happen.


Kids in other countries have far less per pupil spending than FCPS and outperform. Particularly if you are from those countries you questioning why FCPS standard is low.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Most parents who post here want the qualities and privileges that come with a small private school education at their giant FCPS public and will never accept that that isn’t going to happen.


Exactly. Pay a private school and stop demanding what cannot be provided.

Public education was never intended to be particularly high quality.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Most parents who post here want the qualities and privileges that come with a small private school education at their giant FCPS public and will never accept that that isn’t going to happen.


Exactly. Pay a private school and stop demanding what cannot be provided.

Public education was never intended to be particularly high quality.


Dp. For someone who received a high quality public education a few decades ago this is such a strange thing to hear. I expect things to be better...we (collectively) know so much more now!
Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Go to: