Starr on Kojo's Show on Math Acceleration
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
exactly what I was thinking. |
Anonymous
|
In this age of technology and America's potential diminshing global power and relevance I wonder why any public school system would not have a transparent and efficient standard procedure and process for allowing able students to advance -- particularly in math and science.
The lack of a clear plan is comical in a $2 billion/year enterprise (MCPS). If the grade placement regulations of the public school system permit students to have a spread of 2 years (in any given grade) why doesn't the system anticipate there will be a range in physical and academic performance at each grade level? Is the goal here a fixed and hard ceiling of delivered education at each grade level -- despite a 2 year difference in the ages of boys and girls at each level and accompanying considerable variation in input, output and performance? Is this a sustainable strategy in the 21st century -- particularly for subjects like math and science? Is this sustainable in Montgomery County and the area -- home to National Science Foundation, NIST, NIH and a large biotechnology corridor (to name a few enterpises besides law firms, K street, think tanks and non profit foundations)? Will this geographical area start to lose jobs to other regions and shores because of opaque public school policies, motivations and agendae in the early education pipeline making it onerous (and near impossible) for able and willing capable students in math and science to advance? By the time many kids hit middle school or high school the phobias about math and science become entrenched and begin to limit academic and career options and choices. No one is advocating math and science as the holy grail but I have seen far too many kids over the years who regret, as they grow and mature in school, not pursuing academic interests in these and related areas because of a fear of inadequacy in math and having to work too hard in over drive for lack (real or perceived) inadequate preparation. Getting this right starts now in elementary school with curriculum 2.0. Starr, the Board of Education and MCPS take heed. Beware of suffocating children more than ready to move on to the next level. |
Anonymous
I will punt to MCPS. But, if this is true are there enough magnet schools in the County to accommodate almost half of the public school population? |
Anonymous
I may be mistaken, but I think that "gifted" was defined to mean capable of/performing above grade level. Under that definition, 40% in Montgomery county is believable. I personally think it means they should make on grade level work more challenging. |
Anonymous
I think it's combination of both - kids are too smart here (no surprize - MoCo is one of the most educataded areas of the contry) and bar might be too low... National average is about 10%. Anyway, magnet schools can't accommodate even average of 10%; elimination of the advancement in regular school will create a lot of mess. |
Anonymous
I would agree with that. |
Anonymous
| Interesting nuance. I wonder whether the teaching strategy under curriculum 2.0 is congruent with their labelling. I am not a fan of labels. Since MCPS uses this label the implementation and content delivery of curriculum 2.0 may not really be synchronous with the labelling. |
Anonymous
| At any rate, leadership with any savy and emotional intelligence, should understand education is the highest priority for the families of children in this County. Getting the right mix should be the highest priority of the Superintendent and Board of Education. |
Anonymous
|
Parental frustration with the implementation of 2.0 (including all the issues discussed on this thread) demonstrate one very important fact: parents and kids are NOT the customers of this school system. Listening to Sup. Starr on the radio yesterday reinforced this for me.
Any business must be responsive to its customers and would be in full damage control mode at this point if customers had as many concerns/questions about a product as we parents have about 2.0. MCPS is not responsive to the parents and their concerns about their kids' futures. That speaks volumes. |
Anonymous
| It boils down to conflicts of interests (including who hired him and pays his salary). I recognise the students are not his main priority. He is under the sheets with the union and the Board of Education. |
Anonymous
This is absolutely untrue. the 35-40% isn't the number of gifted. The number gifted is really comparable to national numbers. One of the PPs posted the Examiner links and it provides an explanation of what the numbers mean. |
Anonymous
Well, I did get numbers from Gazette http://ww2.gazette.net/stories/03092011/montnew184800_32540.php |
Anonymous
I got http://www.examiner.com/article/the-montgomery-county-gifted-and-talented-identification-process-for-spring-2009 http://www.examiner.com/article/gifted-and-talented-education-montgomery-county-maryland http://www.examiner.com/article/gifted-and-talented-education-is-not-a-cachet-it-is-a-need |
Anonymous
quote from your first link 
"As reported in this column, a system wide average of 40.9% were identified as gifted and talented in 2007–2008, compared with 39.4% in 2006–2007, 39.5% in 2005–2006, 33.8% in 2004–2005 and 44.5% in 2003–2004. " |
Anonymous
What did that identification mean? If you had followed through in the series you would have come across http://www.examiner.com/article/do-38-7-of-montgomery-county-second-graders-find-the-curriculum-too-easy and this http://www.examiner.com/article/in-montgomery-county-maryland-does-the-gifted-label-mean-above-grade It quotes MCPS---"Instead, according to school administrators, “gifted and talented” has come to mean “above grade level,” and some parents have come to wonder whether that means much at all.”" It seems to me--looking at the comments--that some parents hate to acknowledge that the school system has been duping them. |