Anonymous wrote:I subscribed to that forum briefly looking for info on GT Magnets. It was terrible. Basically huge numbers of back and forths between a very small ( and very opinionated) group of people. Probably one of them was the same person who put in all the posts we are seeing here. I dropped it quickly.

I agree. I subscribe, but I delete half the emails I get from that forum. It really is a handful of people. I can't really tell what motivates some of them, which would affect my perception of their points. Plus several seem to be having running spats among themselves. Basically I use it to learn *what's* going on rather than, necessarily, how I should feel about what's going on.

A big problem is that parents get worried that their kid is on the low track, so they won't get into the MS magnet, and then they won't get into the HS magnet, and then their college choices will be disappointing. (I know, I totally know, with magnet kids of my own I'm totally aware about competition from other magnet kids for those HS magnet and college spots, also that kids not in magnets are equally smart because there just isn't enough room in the magnet programs, et cetera.) This is definitely how lots of parents see it. So they push to get their kids into accelerated tracks. Because if you're in on-grade math it's almost impossible to jump to above-grade math the next year, and then you have less of a chance for the Takoma magnet.... The result is a lot of kids who aren't prepared for acceleration, but Mommy and Daddy pushed for it.

To me, the solution is not to fight peoples' natural protectiveness of their kids. The solution is to offer more selective programs, so the pressure is reduced to get your kid into one of the 2 MS magnets, or one of the 3 HS magnets (well, 2 magnets plus CAP). I hate to be like this, but for many parents, some of the downcounty "choice" schools just aren't substitutes just because they aren't selective but are by lottery. (And I'm not giving Poolesville it's due, but for many of us, Poolesville isn't an option for boundary reasons and we just have the 3 HS choices).

So how about a high school magnet that actually does literature and creative writing, and not so much journalism like at CAP? How about another IB magnet, given the obvious excess demand for the existing one at RM (1/9 are accepted)? Maybe a performing arts magnet with auditions?

Problem is, this costs money. Also, MoCo probably doesn't care what parents want, they're patting us on the head with a few HS magnets that take a fraction of the kids who are qualified and could do well at these magnets.

Rant over....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem comes with the definition of gifted. MCPS basically considers any kid who performs above grade level in math and reading to be gifted. MoCO being what it is, a very large number of kids fit this description. I think I have read 40%. So if you ahve 40% of kids performing above grade level, but you aim your curriculum at getting kids to perform at grade level, 40% of kdis are not getting the challenge they need, and their parents are frustrated. There are lots of parents who want their children to be challenged ins chool, but people get defensive and irritated about that because of the use of the word "gifted." maybe they should just call it challenge or enrichment or acceleration, and people's panties wouldn't get twisted.

To me, "above grade level in reading and math" means "above average, not "gifted." This sounds very Lake Wobegon to me. I think there's a difference between "above average" and "gifted." When I was growing up, the definition of GT was very different. But I didn't grow up here, so maybe that's why.

The easy solution would not work here. Changing the label to "Above Average or AA" would be fine for most resonable parents. There is no glory in having the label. However, the real problem is that, there is no consistent service avilable for the the "AA" or "GT" students in MCPS. That is the problem we parents should advocate to solve. The services should not depend on school zone or the principal's discretion(read whim). It should be guided by MCPS policy and tracked by measures to make sure every kid gets at least year worth of education in every subject, every year!

Anonymous wrote:The schools are sort of stuck. They have 5 kids that are quite ready for accelleration but the average class sive is 28..so they need to have 20+ kids in the accelerated class to make it work numbers wise. My older child was way over accelerated based on on absolutely no data that said he should skip so many years. My younger child is taking 4th grade math for the 3rd time because they stopped accleration entirely. He had perfect test scores last year (gr 3) on 4 and 5 math and is still in 4+ this year because they will not accelerate anyone anymore. Gotta love MCPS!

You are so correct. When my DS was in 5th grade there wer about 5 kids out of 30 in his math class who were ready for 7th grade in the 1st qtr itself, but could not be taught at that level since the school had no path after 6th grade Math avilable. At the sametime, the same accelerated class had kids who did not understand franction/%/decimal by third quarter. The teacher had tough time teaching the class.

The real solution would be to test kids every year on each core subject (forget calling it GT, rather call it academic placement) and place them at the right class based on their preparedness rather than age!

Anonymous wrote:The problem comes with the definition of gifted. MCPS basically considers any kid who performs above grade level in math and reading to be gifted. MoCO being what it is, a very large number of kids fit this description. I think I have read 40%. So if you ahve 40% of kids performing above grade level, but you aim your curriculum at getting kids to perform at grade level, 40% of kdis are not getting the challenge they need, and their parents are frustrated. There are lots of parents who want their children to be challenged ins chool, but people get defensive and irritated about that because of the use of the word "gifted." maybe they should just call it challenge or enrichment or acceleration, and people's panties wouldn't get twisted.

To me, "above grade level in reading and math" means "above average, not "gifted." This sounds very Lake Wobegon to me. I think there's a difference between "above average" and "gifted." When I was growing up, the definition of GT was very different. But I didn't grow up here, so maybe that's why.

The schools are sort of stuck. They have 5 kids that are quite ready for accelleration but the average class sive is 28..so they need to have 20+ kids in the accelerated class to make it work numbers wise. My older child was way over accelerated based on on absolutely no data that said he should skip so many years. My younger child is taking 4th grade math for the 3rd time because they stopped accleration entirely. He had perfect test scores last year (gr 3) on 4 and 5 math and is still in 4+ this year because they will not accelerate anyone anymore. Gotta love MCPS!

Anonymous wrote:Another problem is, there is a lot of data coming from MS and HS that indicates that many "gifted" children in elementary school lack basic foundational skills because in the past, they were moved too quickly on to the next topic because they were "bored" in class. This is especially true in math. Parents of these kids don't like to hear it, but sometimes, even though your kid can churn out a math formula or solve something using a strategy they've been taught, they still don't have a depth of understanding that truly leaves them prepared to move on.

Actually, in the past they were moved on too quickly because MCPS was attached to Acceleration in Math for All, regardless of personal cost to students - not because these kids were "bored" in class.

Another problem is, there is a lot of data coming from MS and HS that indicates that many "gifted" children in elementary school lack basic foundational skills because in the past, they were moved too quickly on to the next topic because they were "bored" in class. This is especially true in math. Parents of these kids don't like to hear it, but sometimes, even though your kid can churn out a math formula or solve something using a strategy they've been taught, they still don't have a depth of understanding that truly leaves them prepared to move on.

Anonymous wrote:I subscribed to that forum briefly looking for info on GT Magnets. It was terrible. Basically huge numbers of back and forths between a very small ( and very opinionated) group of people. Probably one of them was the same person who put in all the posts we are seeing here. I dropped it quickly.

Which forum you are referring to?

The problem comes with the definition of gifted. MCPS basically considers any kid who performs above grade level in math and reading to be gifted. MoCO being what it is, a very large number of kids fit this description. I think I have read 40%. So if you ahve 40% of kids performing above grade level, but you aim your curriculum at getting kids to perform at grade level, 40% of kdis are not getting the challenge they need, and their parents are frustrated. There are lots of parents who want their children to be challenged ins chool, but people get defensive and irritated about that because of the use of the word "gifted." maybe they should just call it challenge or enrichment or acceleration, and people's panties wouldn't get twisted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the people who think their kids are GT bash parents how put their kids in travel soccer because they think their kids will be good soccer players. hmmm interesting

Could not understand the comment. Please clarify.

Just a guess, but I think the words "bash parents how" are transposed and the main sentence should be

"I wonder if the people who think their kids are GT bash how parents put their kids in travel soccer because they think their kids will be good soccer players. hmmm interesting"

Read it a couple of times and the fluency will come.

I subscribed to that forum briefly looking for info on GT Magnets. It was terrible. Basically huge numbers of back and forths between a very small ( and very opinionated) group of people. Probably one of them was the same person who put in all the posts we are seeing here. I dropped it quickly.

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the people who think their kids are GT bash parents how put their kids in travel soccer because they think their kids will be good soccer players. hmmm interesting

Could not understand the comment. Please clarify.

I wonder if the people who think their kids are GT bash parents how put their kids in travel soccer because they think their kids will be good soccer players. hmmm interesting

If you want the details you can check pretty much any thread on this forum because rather than posting a thread (and even bumping it) someone has posted info. on every single thread.