Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My guess is that if they expand options beyond 4 and 4/5 they will need to offer these options to students who are not in the HGCs as well. It wouldn't be about expanding options for HGC students just as the expansion to the compacted curriculum was not limited to HGC students.
They should have an option for everyone to be above grade level if they can show mastery of the material at grade level - HCG, non-HGC - the policy to restrict is ridiculous given the population of students this county is serving. Common core was never meant to restrict students from what they could learn, it was meant to provide a baseline for what they should be able to master. That baseline might have more depth than before - but there is nothing that says students should hit a glass ceiling - no matter who they are. If a child can still cover math with the added depth at a faster pace than grade level, then they should be given the same opportunities they were given before 2.0. Everywhere...
Anonymous wrote:My guess is that if they expand options beyond 4 and 4/5 they will need to offer these options to students who are not in the HGCs as well. It wouldn't be about expanding options for HGC students just as the expansion to the compacted curriculum was not limited to HGC students.
Anonymous wrote:The letter is not about math.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Met with my child's teacher yesterday and asked about that mysterious letter we all received. She tells me there has been minor changes with the new 2.0 - basically no difference. It has not been "dumbed down" as I've heard people say. The main reason is that the HGC curriculum writers were pulled to write the regular 4th grade curriculum and that the HGC curriculum was being rolled out a quarter at a time - teachers were not getting enough planning time. Since the former curriculum already met common core (and the fact there were to be few changes to it anyway) they will revert back.
Did you actually fall for that b.s.? Hope not. On its face, it is inaccurate. The fact that opportunities for advanced math (anything beyond math 4/5) have been eliminated under 2.0 is a huge change and a "dumbing down" of the opportunities that used to be available at the HGC (and elsewhere). Three years ago when my DD was at the same HGC that my DD is at now, she was able to do Math 6 or Math 7 in 4th grade. This year the maximum opportunity available for HGC students is math 4/5. This is true regardless of the child's math ability. How is this not a dumbing down?
MCPS is great at dancing around the obvious and using semantics to hide-the-ball. That seems to be at work here. Look, I'm quite happy with the HGC - particularly the non-math aspects - but to pretend that 2.0 hasn't impacted (dumbed down) math at the HGC as well as at the home schools, is just not true.
I was not referring to math.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My child's teacher said that the former HGC curriculum does not meet Common Core.
Interesting. Yet, presumably, the former seemingly-well-received HGC curriculum represented the best of MCPS. I don't think anyone (even the biggest proponents of Common Core) would suggest that it is the same level or above. So, what's the story? Is Common Core simply different? Is this a semantic question: i.e., yes, the old HGC curriculum was "better" but CC insists on different areas of study? What is it?