Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I take complaints about the effects on curriculum 2.0 on 1st and 2d graders with a big grain of salt. Who cares if a 1st grader has less homework?

I wish the main complaint about 2.0 was less homework. Lack of rigor, lack of teaching time, less scope, too much repetition, lack of feedback, poor test scores, etc. come up way before homework changes.

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests. I'm not really sure how 2.0 results in less teaching time, and I am sceptical it is meaningfully less rigorous or has too much repetition at those grades. (The complaints I've heard about repetition were related to adjusting to 2.0, not what 1st/2d graders experience in 2.0).

Most parents do not consider group work to be active teaching. Not in first grade and not in 5th grade.

You've taken a poll?

Also, most parents are not experts in teaching.

Huh? Why distracting from the point. Signals agreement, guilt and immaturity.

If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom.

I think that you are providing evidence to support the point that most parents are not experts in teaching.

What is your actual point?
Parents can't tell the value of something they're paying for (through property taxes) or how their child is/is not developing? Yes, I agree, some "parents" cannot, and others can. Assuming the parent is actually parenting, s/he can decide to continue on, make changes or exit the experimental MoCo school system.
Word is out MoCo, it's no longer the 1980s or 1990s. The state and county policies have affected the school district's curriculum, resource shifts and demographics. The output is here. Reaping what you sow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I take complaints about the effects on curriculum 2.0 on 1st and 2d graders with a big grain of salt. Who cares if a 1st grader has less homework?

I wish the main complaint about 2.0 was less homework. Lack of rigor, lack of teaching time, less scope, too much repetition, lack of feedback, poor test scores, etc. come up way before homework changes.

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests. I'm not really sure how 2.0 results in less teaching time, and I am sceptical it is meaningfully less rigorous or has too much repetition at those grades. (The complaints I've heard about repetition were related to adjusting to 2.0, not what 1st/2d graders experience in 2.0).

Most parents do not consider group work to be active teaching. Not in first grade and not in 5th grade.

You've taken a poll?

Also, most parents are not experts in teaching.

Huh? Why distracting from the point. Signals agreement, guilt and immaturity.

If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom.

I think that you are providing evidence to support the point that most parents are not experts in teaching.

Anonymous wrote:

The idea of accountable government is one thing. The idea that MCPS has to prove that something hasn't happened is quite another.

Bullshit. MCPS has introduced a major philosophical and tactical shift in how they execute instruction. They have changed what they teach and how they teach. MAP measures of academic progress is a nation wide test on basic reading and math foundation skills. MAP was given before 2.0 and after 2.0. MAP is given at schools without 2.0 in other states and throughout MCPS with 2.0.

Only a fool would not be looking at this data. No one rolls out a major initiative without key performance indicators. A key performance indicator is NOT ding dong said we're doing just great.

The idea of accountable government is one thing. The idea that MCPS has to prove that something hasn't happened is quite another.

Anonymous wrote:

The burden of proof is on MCPS to show that MAP scores have not declined? Why?

Have you ever heard of the concept of accountable government? I'm a democrat and the major distinction between Dems and Reps is that Dems believe that government can do good things for people while Reps believe that government can never deliver on those promises.

Organizations like MCPS that do not share data with the public and do not believe that the burden of proof is on them to show that they are delivering basically feed into the Republican fear that $$ given to gov't is wasted. Honestly, the Republicans are correct that many times in government, government doesn't deliver. It doesn't have to be that way though.

IMO, if we vote for government programs and support public education, we have a responsibility to make sure we hold them accountable. I will vote for more funds toward education but not if a bunch of civil servants in MCPS just provide lip service that they are doing a good job. THEY need to prove it.

The burden of proof is on MCPS to show that MAP scores have not declined? Why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I take complaints about the effects on curriculum 2.0 on 1st and 2d graders with a big grain of salt. Who cares if a 1st grader has less homework?

I wish the main complaint about 2.0 was less homework. Lack of rigor, lack of teaching time, less scope, too much repetition, lack of feedback, poor test scores, etc. come up way before homework changes.

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests. I'm not really sure how 2.0 results in less teaching time, and I am sceptical it is meaningfully less rigorous or has too much repetition at those grades. (The complaints I've heard about repetition were related to adjusting to 2.0, not what 1st/2d graders experience in 2.0).

Most parents do not consider group work to be active teaching. Not in first grade and not in 5th grade.

You've taken a poll?

Also, most parents are not experts in teaching.

Huh? Why distracting from the point. Signals agreement, guilt and immaturity.

If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I take complaints about the effects on curriculum 2.0 on 1st and 2d graders with a big grain of salt. Who cares if a 1st grader has less homework?

I wish the main complaint about 2.0 was less homework. Lack of rigor, lack of teaching time, less scope, too much repetition, lack of feedback, poor test scores, etc. come up way before homework changes.

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests. I'm not really sure how 2.0 results in less teaching time, and I am sceptical it is meaningfully less rigorous or has too much repetition at those grades. (The complaints I've heard about repetition were related to adjusting to 2.0, not what 1st/2d graders experience in 2.0).

Most parents do not consider group work to be active teaching. Not in first grade and not in 5th grade.

You've taken a poll?

Also, most parents are not experts in teaching.

Anonymous wrote:

And do you or or that poster have evidence that indicates MAP scores have declined under 2.0? I don't think so.

I'm not the PP about group learning but could you please provide evidence that MAP scores have not declined? The burden of proof should be on MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

And do you or or that poster have evidence that indicates MAP scores have declined under 2.0? I don't think so.

I'm not the PP about group learning but could you please provide evidence that MAP scores have not declined? The burden of proof should be on MCPS.

And do you or or that poster have evidence that indicates MAP scores have declined under 2.0? I don't think so.

Anonymous wrote:

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests.

This is not true. They take the MAP tests a few times a year. The school doesn't send home the results but you can ask for them Good schools will readily hand them to you, others will try to avoid it because its work to respond to anything.

1st and 2d graders don't take standardized tests.