I really encourage parents whose kids are bored or coming home without any wrong answers to push their teachers to give their child more appropriate level work. At first, I wouldn't request acceleration or re-grouping of classrooms because that will just be resisted. Instead, just keep pushing for more challenge. Eventually, after they fail to challenge your kid within the existing grade level curriculum and class room set up, then start pushing for acceleration. Be a pain in the a**. The current philosophy to lump kids of different levels into one class and then stick them with a curriculum geared for the middle group is not going to work for some struggling kids and for some top kids. Policy makers generally ignore special ed and gifted kid parents at public forums. Another avenue for parents, though, is to just continue speak up at the point where all the policies are implemented: the classroom. They say grand things about their policies, so press the teachers and the schools to show you something grand.

Anonymous wrote:Our school is offering 2.0 Curriculum and is still accelerating at least 1 full class of kids in a combo 1-2 years ahead grouping. This means kids are taught 2 years of math in one year, with the grade being given for 1 year acceleration skills and the "challenge" section being the second year of acceleration. Second year ahead material is not part of the grade, but if children do well on it through out the year, they could skip that grade and will end up 2 years ahead next year.

I love that school. Which school is that?

All the assessments are there--they are just different. The county is no longer using those big summative assessments. There are still formatives and some schools are piloting MAP-M as a benchmark assessment. The county is moving away from summative assessment "of" learning and into ongoing assessment "for" learning.

I thought I heard that they don't have all the assessments available yet. Anyone know about that?

Our school is offering 2.0 Curriculum and is still accelerating at least 1 full class of kids in a combo 1-2 years ahead grouping. This means kids are taught 2 years of math in one year, with the grade being given for 1 year acceleration skills and the "challenge" section being the second year of acceleration. Second year ahead material is not part of the grade, but if children do well on it through out the year, they could skip that grade and will end up 2 years ahead next year.

If I were you, I'd talk with the teacher and then the principal about how they are assessing where your child is ready to learn. There's no reason they can't give your child on grade level assessments. Those would then give the school -- and you -- data. If you have data to back you up it's easier to ask the hard questions, like -- what are you doing to give my child work that he/she is ready for?

Seems like now there is no opportunity to move up? Or am I missing something. Its a shame, my child can do all of the math before they teach it, yet he gets taught same as everyone else.

Pre-curriculum 2.0, children within the same grade would move to different classrooms or up a grade for the grade level math that they were ready for. It used to be some classes on grade level, some doing grade level + half of the next grade and one doing 1 grade level ahead.

Now, focus is on depth and not accelerating. A child doing 1 grade ahead is doing just that. I don't see any opportunities for moving 2 grades up in younger son's school with the new curriculum, something older child is currently doing at his school.

just curious... what does 1 or 2 year acceleration mean? If you are in 2nd grade you go to 3rd or 4th for math?

Did they previously to do this in first grade (pre-curriculum 2.0)?

For my child the first grade math is easy. Haven't had conferences so I'm not sure 100% how it is going from teacher perspective. Also have nothing to compare since this is my oldest.

My ES is still offering (1 year) acceleration in math..though not 2 anymore.

Yes, my son's school returned to grouping for a subset of children who need a full grade level ahead in math. Children who were doing the half-grade acceleration in the past are not moving classrooms. I haven't heard of any other schools doing this, but maybe there are?

Also, one thing I've noticed about the assessments is how weak the information is. There's no way I can tell what grade level of work my child is really ready for. That's different than the assessments I've always gotten for my older child that show me where he is on the grade level he is in as well as in the grade level that is one grade higher.

It makes me wonder how the schools could even know if a child needs multiple grade level acceleration.

An upcoming forum on 2.0 and acceleration/gifted ed:

The MCCPTA Gifted Child Committee will host Marty Creel, MCPS Director of Enriched and Innovative Programming, for a discussion of Curriculum 2.0 geared specifically to gifted education, on November 30, 2011 at 7-9 p.m. in the auditorium at Carver Educational Services Center, 850 Hungerford Drive, Rockville 20850. Marty will present an overview of C2.0 and its relationship to the new standards Maryland has adopted, discuss the acceleration and enrichment tools built into the new curriculum, and take parent questions. Unlike the Parent Academy sessions on C2.0, this one will be geared specifically to the needs of the advanced level learner.

All interested parents are welcome and encouraged to attend and ask questions.

What do you mean--your school returned to grouping?

Yes, in curriculum 2.0 -- 2nd grade. Was totally bored until school decided they need to go back to moving for acceleration. Worried about what will happen in future years.

Anyone whose child is using the new 2.0 math curriculum--How is it going for him/her?