Benchmark is awful - what can be done

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

Why is it corruption? MCPS is not the only district in the US using Benchmark. Changing curriculum is not a simple process.

DP. The choice made NO sense at all and was against the recommendations from the advisory committee (or whatever it was called). It's possible it was flat out incompetence, or MCPS staff being swayed by something shiny, but it also would not surprise me at all if there was more to it than that.

What did the Advisory committee recommend?

DP here - I distinctly remember the Ed Reports (an independent group), which they kept citing as recommending Eureka, did not recommend Benchmark. There was one ELA finalist (and only one) that was recommended, so people assumed they would go with that one—but no, they didn’t, and now we are stuck with Benchmark. I can’t remember the name of the first a list that was recommended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s incredible to me that arguing that kids should be reading and discussing decent books in school is a controversial statement.

It's probably the same posters who said "school is not childcare." Apparently school is not for literature either.

Don't know about that but why do you think Benchmark doesn't include great books.

Have you read the benchmark books?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

Why is it corruption? MCPS is not the only district in the US using Benchmark. Changing curriculum is not a simple process.

DP. The choice made NO sense at all and was against the recommendations from the advisory committee (or whatever it was called). It's possible it was flat out incompetence, or MCPS staff being swayed by something shiny, but it also would not surprise me at all if there was more to it than that.

What did the Advisory committee recommend?

DP here - I distinctly remember the Ed Reports (an independent group), which they kept citing as recommending Eureka, did not recommend Benchmark. There was one ELA finalist (and only one) that was recommended, so people assumed they would go with that one—but no, they didn’t, and now we are stuck with Benchmark. I can’t remember the name of the first a list that was recommended.

Yeah I know what you’re referring to- I feel like it was posted here at some point and I can’t find it now. I think one of the reasons benchmark was selected was inclusion of more Spanish materials.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

Why is it corruption? MCPS is not the only district in the US using Benchmark. Changing curriculum is not a simple process.

Don’t be obtuse. You know how the game is played. These textbook companies offer sales positions to former teachers in the hopes of winning big money. Doesn’t matter how good or bad the curriculum is…your Superintendent was on payroll of Discovery Channel’s curriculum before she took 300,000 from the county gig.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

RGR will be used with all students in K - 2. Teachers will omit the phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

RGR will be used with all students in K - 2. Teachers will omit the phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum.

This is great news!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Why wasn’t it being used from the beginning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

RGR will be used with all students in K - 2. Teachers will omit the phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum.

And 3-5?

[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:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Benchmark is a mess in the lower grades. How about for grades 4 & 5? How much better is the newer Benchmark Advance 2022 better for upper grades?

It's just as bad. It repeats the same topics year after year, so kids are bored. Plus readings are all at or below grade level, so anyone who is above grade level is extra bored and unchallenged.

Same main topic or same content? Because those are two very different things. The first could be very helpful and provide both foundation, depth and appropriate spiraling. The second would be very boring. I also thought with the new 2022 version there was going to be more novel study?

The units all cover the same topics and just have different readings. So for example, every year they will do a unit on westward expansion.

I could be okay with this because this is a very broad topic are there are some lots of topics under Westward expansion that could be covered. Especially if we consider Westward expansion most expansion beyond the 13 Colonies.


Settling of the MidWest
Settling of the West
Trail of Tears
Settlement building

My daughter keeps saying that she has read all this before. I checked and it is technically different texts, but it's all making the same points, so I understand why she is bored. The bigger problems are the structural ones--not following the science of reading, not offering above grade-level texts--but it would be nice to have content that actually engages the students.

This. The not-well-done spiral curriculum is a problem too, but secondary.

For examples of Benchmark's upper grade materials, 5th graders read a chapter from Call of the Wild and a chapter from Tom Sawyer. The nonfiction materials are generated by Benchmark and are very dull. At our school the students and teachers found the unit on corn so awful that they now skip it.

Do kids ever read entire books, or is it just these chapters?

Teachers can assign online books on Benchmark to a reading group. But whole-group time and most reading-group time at our school is using the base Benchmark materials, which is just excerpts. If your school has purchased enrichment materials or offers ELC, then kids in the enriched reading group can get non-Benchmark offerings added in. However, this is optional and some schools only offer Benchmark. Ours has some enrichment but does not offer ELC, so the offerings outside of Benchmark are pretty sparse and only offered to kids who qualify for enrichment.

So does that mean that the only kids regularly reading entire books are the ones who qualify for enrichment? This is just astonishing to me. I remember reading full books regularly starting in 3rd grade at my public school in the NYC suburbs in the 90s. My daughter is going into K and I’m just very disturbed by all of this.

Well I think they all get assigned Benchmark books online. But in terms of physical books, whether anyone gets anything is up to the individual school—there is no requirement that even kids in the enriched reading group get anything extra.

I don’t even mean physical vs online, though I do think reading comprehension is much better with physical materials. I am really asking whether the books the kids get assigned are full books, or are just excerpts.

Benchmark has an online library of books. But they aren’t particularly long. I think the books are written for Benchmark.

Wow. I guess the days of kids reading books by actual authors (Bridge to Terabithia, Mrs Frisby and the Rats of Nimh, Hatchet, The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, Call of the Wild, etc.) are gone. That’s really sad.

And then everyone wonders why kids don’t like to read- the benchmark passages/books are truly awful. I really don’t get any of this.

Agreed. I am a voracious reader, was one of those kids who was always reading whatever I could get my hands on. The Benchmark materials are excruciatingly boring and pointless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

RGR will be used with all students in K - 2. Teachers will omit the phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum.

And 3-5?

Stuck with Benchmark - unless they are in 4/5 and are either in CES or qualify for ELC at a school that offers it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS doing its MCPS thing. Listen it has been bad for YEARS in curriculum decision-making. Hubris made them think they could write their own curricula with Pearson: Benchmark sounds like flat out corruption. How many former MCPS employees are on Benchmark’s pitch team? THIS is why MCPS needs an Inspector General. Got tired of all the tutoring needed to support basic blocking and tackling - left a w district during the pandemic. Other places aren’t as dumb!

I agree that Benchmark is probably awful (I'm a PP who posted about my 6th grade students complaining about it) BUT, I was there at the pitch day (for elementary and middle school) and the Benchmark presenter was a little old lady. It was the least 'polished' presentation compared to the other giant companies who presented. So in *this* case I don't think corruption. I didn't like StudySync that day at the presentation, and now after being forced to 'teach' with it for a few years, I loathe it.

Thanks for chiming in- why do you think MCPS picked it then? It seems like every ES teacher I’ve talked to about it doesn’t understand the selection of benchmark.

Here is the presentation Niki Hazel gave to the BOE when they recommended Benchmark:

https://go.boarddocs.com/mabe/mcpsmd/Board.nsf/files/B9FENM50A5A2/$file/Apprv%20Curr%20Inst%20Mat%20Pre-K-5%20Elem%20Lit%20190212%20PPT.pdf

Based on this sounds like it was enthusiastically supported. Also seems like it does (or should have) contained Phonics. Given this I can see why they are trying to work with w/ Benchmark. Particularly if Benchmark has made some changes for more explicit phonics instruction and if MCPS or principals are going to invest more in the using the associated reading texts.

I also wonder how much the pandemic has had an impact on the implementation/training of this?

Benchmark's phonics component is so lackluster that MCPS K - 2 teachers will be using Really Great Reading's phonics program next year with their students. The phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum will not be taught. Really Great Reading is an excellent program. Other school systems use it for their core phonics curriculum (Frederick County), but up until now MCPS has only used it for kids requiring intervention. Perhaps if we had been using Really Great Reading all along we wouldn't have as many foundational gaps. I'm a 3rd grade teacher and my sister is a reading specialist. We both hate Benchmark.

Will all MCPS be using Really Great Reading with all students next year, or is it being piloted only? Thx!

RGR will be used with all students in K - 2. Teachers will omit the phonics lessons from the Benchmark curriculum.

And 3-5?

Stuck with Benchmark - unless they are in 4/5 and are either in CES or qualify for ELC at a school that offers it.

PP here - I'm not 100% sure of the plans for 3-5th but we do have a required reading training this summer so I'm wondering if they will have us infuse some of Really Great Reading into our instruction. I honestly can't wait for Benchmark to go. The texts are just so boring for the kids. I've started having most of my 3rd grade reading groups do novel studies so that they can read and enjoy actual books.

[Anonymous]

Thank you so much PP. My kindergartener has brought home numerous packets of homework from Benchmark and I am absolutely horrified by the daily assignments. It’s literally the same assignment over and over again since the beginning of school. There is a short story (a few sentences) the child is somehow supposed to “read” but it is written at about a 2nd grade level. Then the same questions are asked (again, that a child who likely is still learning basic letters and sounds and sight words is supposed to “read”). The questions are: circle a word with the letter ____ in it, draw a smiley face next to your favorite part, and draw a picture to respond to the story. It’s the same thing, over and over. My kid spends more time drawing than learning anything!

I’m no Piaget or Montessori, but I took a few early childhood classes in college and substitute taught for a year and have done some volunteer work in K-5 and worked at a literacy nonprofit, and I can see clearly how lousy this curriculum is. I cannot believe any thinking human being with a modicum of intelligence and understanding of how children learn to read would knowingly select this garbage curriculum. It is absolute crap.