Anonymous wrote:taught in the past
You are no longer the expert then, right? Times change.
Curriculum 2.0 is basically a step closer to IB, which is the highest level. It's one of the 7 Keys, in fact. So unless you know much about the IB framework, which includes PYP/MYP/DP, I don't think you can challenge the thinking behind Curriculum 2.0.
I would rather know that my child is being taught to think critically instead of blowing through indicator after indicator. Put your teacher hat on again and research the Common Core Standards. They help students to develop critical thinking skills. Maybe you'll begin to see the big picture.
I AM a teacher trained in IB, AP and common core. So I know of what I speak.
Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the logic that a system with four points of measurement is not a four point scale...
If its easy for everyone to get a P but not defined nor achievable to get an ES then you are just teaching kids not to care about school work.
Anonymous wrote:Are all the schools under Curriculum 2.0 implementing, I, P, ES scheme?
Or are some schools still using A, B, C even when they implement Curriculum 2.0?
It seems it would be unfair to compare two students from different schools, if they implement different grading systems.
Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the logic that a system with four points of measurement is not a four point scale. The worksheets that we have seen come home do not offer ability to distinguish yourself as exceptionally above grade level. An ES measurement would make sense in the old system where acceleration was an option in the curriculum. However, Curriculum 2.0 does not allow acceleration. The enrichment sheets that we have seen are no different than the regular sheets. Its an increase in quantity not depth or level.
It sounds like ES will be given as an arbitrary or subjective grade to kids whom the teacher perceives as being far ahead entering the class.
I also think the broader problem is that kids are not learning how to work hard or challenge themselves to achieve something. I taught and I was known as very tough but fair. I fought against grade inflation but I also made sure that it was clear to my students what was required to reach the highest score. I strove to create a classroom where merit was rewarded because this is the true driver for future success. It may have been difficult for kids who didn't come in knowing everything already to achieve the top score but it was defined and within reach if they applied themselves.
If its easy for everyone to get a P but not defined nor achievable to get an ES then you are just teaching kids not to care about school work.
Anonymous wrote:I fail to see the logic that a system with four points of measurement is not a four point scale. The worksheets that we have seen come home do not offer ability to distinguish yourself as exceptionally above grade level. An ES measurement would make sense in the old system where acceleration was an option in the curriculum. However, Curriculum 2.0 does not allow acceleration. The enrichment sheets that we have seen are no different than the regular sheets. Its an increase in quantity not depth or level.
It sounds like ES will be given as an arbitrary or subjective grade to kids whom the teacher perceives as being far ahead entering the class.
I also think the broader problem is that kids are not learning how to work hard or challenge themselves to achieve something. I taught and I was known as very tough but fair. I fought against grade inflation but I also made sure that it was clear to my students what was required to reach the highest score. I strove to create a classroom where merit was rewarded because this is the true driver for future success. It may have been difficult for kids who didn't come in knowing everything already to achieve the top score but it was defined and within reach if they applied themselves.
If its easy for everyone to get a P but not defined nor achievable to get an ES then you are just teaching kids not to care about school work.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Institutionalizing mediocrity is basically what you are describing.
I love the MCPS employee description of "doing everything correctly on the sheet would = P" but doesn't necessarily demonstrate exceptional understanding beyond the grade level...yet doing the worksheet and getting a P is the goal "for all children to score by the end of the year."
This sums up the problem that so many parents have with 2.0!! We WANT our children to be given MORE material and RICHER material so they will have the OPPORTUNITY to reach an exceptional level of understanding. We don't want teachers to stop with a worksheet that the central office deems to be a proficient level of understanding of some subject. That is why parents think 2.0 is about dumbing down the students.
PP, why are you assuming that your child is getting work that is easy. Perhaps the work is so challenging that all he can get is a P. If he gets an ES, isn't that an indication that the work is too easy for him -- he was able to go beyond what was presented.
I also don't think you can fault the teacher for teaching the curriculum. MCPS have been penalized for not doing so. I have never met a teacher that was happy being forced to strictly follow the curriculum from the central office (as opposed to using it as a starting point), since it infringes on the teacher's creativity.
If you don't like the curriculum, direct your complaints to the central office.
Anonymous wrote:Institutionalizing mediocrity is basically what you are describing.
I love the MCPS employee description of "doing everything correctly on the sheet would = P" but doesn't necessarily demonstrate exceptional understanding beyond the grade level...yet doing the worksheet and getting a P is the goal "for all children to score by the end of the year."
This sums up the problem that so many parents have with 2.0!! We WANT our children to be given MORE material and RICHER material so they will have the OPPORTUNITY to reach an exceptional level of understanding. We don't want teachers to stop with a worksheet that the central office deems to be a proficient level of understanding of some subject. That is why parents think 2.0 is about dumbing down the students.