Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve got three kids in McPS that have been at 5 different schools over 13 years. I think McPS has generally done a great job although there’s some unevenness and I wish the English curriculum was different. My kids always score high proficient or whatever the thing above that is.
But I also recognize we are upper income educated parents who speak English as our first language. For the most part, I think McPS is doing pretty well with kids like ours. But there are a ton of low income and ESL families in McPS and I’m not surprised they aren’t reaching proficiency.
I also think the tests aren’t well designed so they overstate the problem a bit. My kids are really top students so the fact that they don’t always get the top category suggests to me that the test is not fully recognizing their level off proficiency.

Read about the opportunity myth. Most MCPS students are fulfilling the expectations of their classes. The problem is the standards are so low that fulfilling those expectations and getting good grades doesn’t prepare them for college or beyond.

And it isn’t just the poor kids who aren’t getting good instruction. So you can’t just sit there feeling good that your white kids are fine.

Read the article in Bethesda Magazine. It talks about how most kids at schools at ALL socioeconomic levels aren’t getting rigorous enough work.

BS I had six children leave MCPS and head to either Ivies or places like MIT . Every single one called at sometime in their four years to say Thank You for sending us to MCPS.

My youngest had a hard time learning to read and write . Freshman year at GA tech he calls and says omg mom no one here can write a paper or speak coherently in front of a freshman English class.

Spare us your stupidity MCPS is large and diverse they do a great job given how hard it is to teach.

BOE about to elect a Libsoftictok supporter worry about that!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

An FAQ is not research. The actual numbers are much lower: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183124/

From that analysis:
How prevalent dyslexia is depends upon the severity or cut-off used for identification. Common estimates of the prevalence of dyslexia fall in the range of 3 to 7 percent when specifying a criterion of scoring 1.5 standard deviations or more below the mean on measures of reading (Fletcher et al., 2019, Peterson & Pennington, 2012; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Similar estimates have been attained from cross-cultural studies (Moll, Kuntz, Neuhoff, Bruder, & Shulte-Korne, 2014; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Prevalence estimates are higher when the cut-off used for identification is less stringent. For example, by applying a cut-off of scoring at the 25th percentile in reading (which corresponds to approximately two-thirds of a standard deviation) and/or an IQ-achievement regression-based definition of 1.5 standard deviations, prevalence was estimated to be 17.4 percent of the school-age population (Shaywitz et al., 1992). However, most estimates of prevalence fall below 10 percent (Hoeft, McCardle, & Pugh, 2015).

If you define dyslexia broadly enough, you can get the number close to 20%, but most estimates are much lower than that.

You can cite the NIH article, but the fact of the matter is that if you actually dig into it, you’ll see you can get to 18% by including kids at the 25th percentile in reading.

Anyone at that level is absolutely struggling and needs help.

The ultimate point here is not whether dyslexia prevalence is 10 or 20 percent. The point is that without systematic reading instruction, many kids simply won’t learn to read.

Defining dyslexia as the lowest 25% or whatever in a cohort is ridiculous. It’s supposed to describe the kids who are essentially incapable of reading well, even with good learning opportunities. And as many PP have said, the main reason so many kids can’t read well these days is because of poor parenting. They certainly haven’t had adequate learning opportunities to dismiss a full fifth or quarter or whatever as having a learning disability.

I agree that those low performing kids need serious help though. The parents obviously aren’t going to do it. Mainstream classes aren’t enough for this - it just slows everyone else down. Since so many kids are poor readers now and other kids are starting school reading chapter books, they should separate kids according to ability to give everyone what they need.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

An FAQ is not research. The actual numbers are much lower: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183124/

From that analysis:
How prevalent dyslexia is depends upon the severity or cut-off used for identification. Common estimates of the prevalence of dyslexia fall in the range of 3 to 7 percent when specifying a criterion of scoring 1.5 standard deviations or more below the mean on measures of reading (Fletcher et al., 2019, Peterson & Pennington, 2012; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Similar estimates have been attained from cross-cultural studies (Moll, Kuntz, Neuhoff, Bruder, & Shulte-Korne, 2014; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Prevalence estimates are higher when the cut-off used for identification is less stringent. For example, by applying a cut-off of scoring at the 25th percentile in reading (which corresponds to approximately two-thirds of a standard deviation) and/or an IQ-achievement regression-based definition of 1.5 standard deviations, prevalence was estimated to be 17.4 percent of the school-age population (Shaywitz et al., 1992). However, most estimates of prevalence fall below 10 percent (Hoeft, McCardle, & Pugh, 2015).

If you define dyslexia broadly enough, you can get the number close to 20%, but most estimates are much lower than that.

You can cite the NIH article, but the fact of the matter is that if you actually dig into it, you’ll see you can get to 18% by including kids at the 25th percentile in reading.

Anyone at that level is absolutely struggling and needs help.

The ultimate point here is not whether dyslexia prevalence is 10 or 20 percent. The point is that without systematic reading instruction, many kids simply won’t learn to read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another look at MCAP results from another source: https://wtop.com/maryland/2024/08/maryland-test-results-show-small-gains-nagging-achievement-gaps-among-demographic-groups/

MCPS claims we're beating state averages, which I guess might be true, but when you roll up all the grade levels and the results, here's how things shake out by Math:



Carroll, Worcester and Howard County Public Schools outperformed MCPS in math.



For ELA, it's worse. Harford, Queen Anne's, Frederick, Calvert, Howard, Carroll, Worcester all outperformed MCPS in ELA.

Are there any policies or procedures that the more successful school systems are following that we should consider following?

Which successful school systems are you talking about? Because I don't see any successful school system from these results.

Worcester’s 70% ELA proficiency is good, but yeah — no one is doing well with math.

Worcester has about 7,000 students total. Therefore maybe 100 to 200 students at most take MCAP. That helps keep your average higher.

No matter how many students a school system has taking the test, wouldn't each school system have approximately the same student to teacher ratio? I don't know how having a much smaller test sample change the pass rate unless there were a significantly greater ratio of people to help them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another look at MCAP results from another source: https://wtop.com/maryland/2024/08/maryland-test-results-show-small-gains-nagging-achievement-gaps-among-demographic-groups/

MCPS claims we're beating state averages, which I guess might be true, but when you roll up all the grade levels and the results, here's how things shake out by Math:



Carroll, Worcester and Howard County Public Schools outperformed MCPS in math.



For ELA, it's worse. Harford, Queen Anne's, Frederick, Calvert, Howard, Carroll, Worcester all outperformed MCPS in ELA.

Are there any policies or procedures that the more successful school systems are following that we should consider following?

Which successful school systems are you talking about? Because I don't see any successful school system from these results.

Worcester’s 70% ELA proficiency is good, but yeah — no one is doing well with math.

Worcester has about 7,000 students total. Therefore maybe 100 to 200 students at most take MCAP. That helps keep your average higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

An FAQ is not research. The actual numbers are much lower: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8183124/

From that analysis:
How prevalent dyslexia is depends upon the severity or cut-off used for identification. Common estimates of the prevalence of dyslexia fall in the range of 3 to 7 percent when specifying a criterion of scoring 1.5 standard deviations or more below the mean on measures of reading (Fletcher et al., 2019, Peterson & Pennington, 2012; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Similar estimates have been attained from cross-cultural studies (Moll, Kuntz, Neuhoff, Bruder, & Shulte-Korne, 2014; Snowling & Melby-Lervag, 2016). Prevalence estimates are higher when the cut-off used for identification is less stringent. For example, by applying a cut-off of scoring at the 25th percentile in reading (which corresponds to approximately two-thirds of a standard deviation) and/or an IQ-achievement regression-based definition of 1.5 standard deviations, prevalence was estimated to be 17.4 percent of the school-age population (Shaywitz et al., 1992). However, most estimates of prevalence fall below 10 percent (Hoeft, McCardle, & Pugh, 2015).

If you define dyslexia broadly enough, you can get the number close to 20%, but most estimates are much lower than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

Systemic reading instruction is what they do in kindergarten. You learn the letters and the sounds. The parents still need to supplement that at home.

What am I fighting? If there is deterioration in school performace or test scores, that means parents involvement in childs education is declining. Are you suggesting that dyslexia is increasing and that is the reason for poor school performace?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

Reading every day with their parents is the greatest predictor of a small child's future academic success. Every six year old that reads well has parents that have been reading with them, sounding out words, and learning letters since they were toddlers. The reason most grade school children with reading deficiencies have trouble is due to parental failures and not because of some overworked kindergarten teacher with 80 students.

And 20 percent of human beings do not have dyslexia. That's ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

It's not osmosis. You read 15 minutes per day and then in Kindergarten start having the kid read you those 2-3 letter word books like Bob Books.

Nobody can complain about schools unless they are doing this minimum amount of work with their kids at home daily.

And 20% of kids do not have dyslexia. NIH says 5%. The only source that says 20% are companues trying to sell services.

The latest research is from Yale: https://dyslexia.yale.edu/dyslexia/dyslexia-faq/

And yes — what you’re describing is osmosis. The kid will apparently internalize what you’re reading, such that they’ll be able read Bob Books when they’re in kindergarten.

Guess what? My kid couldn’t do that. Many smart kids can’t do that. They needed systematic reading instruction to learn to read.

This is well known. Why are you fighting it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

Reading every day with their parents is the greatest predictor of a small child's future academic success. Every six year old that reads well has parents that have been reading with them, sounding out words, and learning letters since they were toddlers. The reason most grade school children with reading deficiencies have trouble is due to parental failures and not because of some overworked kindergarten teacher with 80 students.

And 20 percent of human beings do not have dyslexia. That's ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you read a story with any kid in preschool and kindergarten before bedtime, they will be reading children's books on their own in first grade.

That's all it takes. It's a very small 15 minutes per day investment.

Same with math spend 15 minutes per day with your kid doing math and they will be way ahead.

You’re delusional.

For one, 20% of kids have dyslexia. No amount of reading to them will teach them to read. They need intensive, systematic phonics-based reading instruction.

Another roughly 60% of kids don’t have dyslexia but still need intentional reading instruction.

It’s rare for kids to just pick up reading by osmosis the way you’re describing. It’s a myth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve got three kids in McPS that have been at 5 different schools over 13 years. I think McPS has generally done a great job although there’s some unevenness and I wish the English curriculum was different. My kids always score high proficient or whatever the thing above that is.
But I also recognize we are upper income educated parents who speak English as our first language. For the most part, I think McPS is doing pretty well with kids like ours. But there are a ton of low income and ESL families in McPS and I’m not surprised they aren’t reaching proficiency.
I also think the tests aren’t well designed so they overstate the problem a bit. My kids are really top students so the fact that they don’t always get the top category suggests to me that the test is not fully recognizing their level off proficiency.

Read about the opportunity myth. Most MCPS students are fulfilling the expectations of their classes. The problem is the standards are so low that fulfilling those expectations and getting good grades doesn’t prepare them for college or beyond.

And it isn’t just the poor kids who aren’t getting good instruction. So you can’t just sit there feeling good that your white kids are fine.

Read the article in Bethesda Magazine. It talks about how most kids at schools at ALL socioeconomic levels aren’t getting rigorous enough work.

BS I had six children leave MCPS and head to either Ivies or places like MIT . Every single one called at sometime in their four years to say Thank You for sending us to MCPS.

My youngest had a hard time learning to read and write . Freshman year at GA tech he calls and says omg mom no one here can write a paper or speak coherently in front of a freshman English class.

Spare us your stupidity MCPS is large and diverse they do a great job given how hard it is to teach.

BOE about to elect a Libsoftictok supporter worry about that!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve got three kids in McPS that have been at 5 different schools over 13 years. I think McPS has generally done a great job although there’s some unevenness and I wish the English curriculum was different. My kids always score high proficient or whatever the thing above that is.
But I also recognize we are upper income educated parents who speak English as our first language. For the most part, I think McPS is doing pretty well with kids like ours. But there are a ton of low income and ESL families in McPS and I’m not surprised they aren’t reaching proficiency.
I also think the tests aren’t well designed so they overstate the problem a bit. My kids are really top students so the fact that they don’t always get the top category suggests to me that the test is not fully recognizing their level off proficiency.

Read about the opportunity myth. Most MCPS students are fulfilling the expectations of their classes. The problem is the standards are so low that fulfilling those expectations and getting good grades doesn’t prepare them for college or beyond.

And it isn’t just the poor kids who aren’t getting good instruction. So you can’t just sit there feeling good that your white kids are fine.

Read the article in Bethesda Magazine. It talks about how most kids at schools at ALL socioeconomic levels aren’t getting rigorous enough work.