One other thing about these math test scores.

They've known about this for a while -- it's nothing new -- and aren't doing anything about it. There is a lot of data that should help them identify where the issue is, and it's either that the test is the wrong test for what's being taught, the teachers aren't teaching effectively, or the students aren't learning what they should be learning.

There are ways to address all three of those issues and he needs to be clearer on what's being done.

Anonymous wrote:Can somebody tell me what they think Starr should be doing? What policy should he be following and how should he be implementing it? It seems like a tough job to try to balance everyone's needs in such a huge school district. If what he's doing is wrong, what is the alternative and is it feasible and advisable? I'm asking this without having an opinion of whether he's screwing up or not.

I don't believe he's stupid. I do think he behaves in an arrogant way. His "parent outreach" sessions are constructed more like lectures, with no real opportunity for people to speak out about things that they think are important, and he talks down to people.

I don't like his focus on social/emotional education -- it's a trendy, jargony approach, and it allows him to sidestep real concerns about curriculum, etc.

I don't think he truly understands or cares about the concerns of my particular cohort -- parents of high performing kids in the former "red zone." He treats our concerns with contempt. This is exacerbated by the fact that he chose to buy a house where his kids would attend the whitest, least diverse elementary school in the county. I know people think this isn't a valid criticism but there are SO many other areas within MCPS with very high performing schools and a population that's more representative of the county as a whole.

I would like to see him:

- provide real and substantive training to teachers who are expected to roll out curriculum 2.0
- explain, not excuse, the issue with math test performance, and provide a road map for how to fix the problem
- support and increase the availability of attractive programs in the "red zone" to retain high performing kids
- acknowledge that one size doesn't fit all and incorporate the latest research on ability grouping, instead of insisting that differentiation is appropriate or even possible in classrooms where ability levels may span six or seven grade levels
- stop the ceaseless promoting of MCPS on the national stage, a practice which takes tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money to travel MCPS administrators to conferences around the country, and use that money to hire more classroom teachers and protect programs like music and art

Can somebody tell me what they think Starr should be doing? What policy should he be following and how should he be implementing it? It seems like a tough job to try to balance everyone's needs in such a huge school district. If what he's doing is wrong, what is the alternative and is it feasible and advisable? I'm asking this without having an opinion of whether he's screwing up or not.

Anonymous wrote:Pp, they need two parents and they need two parents who care. The MoCo school system cannot raise, parent, feed, house and teach every child who has uninvolved parents and expect good test scores. Whether that's due to parents' lack of skills, education, language ability, income, common sense or whatever. There will never be enough money, resources, or people to raise other people's many children.

At last, some honesty. Let's stop pretending that throwing tax dollars at a bloated school system will solve these problems.

Anonymous wrote: "they need two parents and they need two parents who
care"

They need a whole community that cares..it is in all of our best interest to make sure each and every child grows up to be a contributer.

Families have to raise kids and make sure they grow up to be the best they can be. There is only so much a larger community can do. That's just reality.

Also, not sure what you mean by a "contributor" but it sounds oddly sci-fy. I don't want a "whole community" working together to make sure my kids grow up to be a "contributor." Shudder.

"they need two parents and they need two parents who
care"

They need a whole community that cares..it is in all of our best interest to make sure each and every child grows up to be a contributer.

Anonymous wrote:That is precisely the reason that low income kids don't succeed (generally speaking). They come from a culture that doesn't value education. In our UMC household, homework is the minimum bar and we supplement go to the library, extra math, writing,etc.

Wow -- generalize much?

That is precisely the reason that low income kids don't succeed (generally speaking). They come from a culture that doesn't value education. In our UMC household, homework is the minimum bar and we supplement go to the library, extra math, writing,etc.

Pp, they need two parents and they need two parents who care. The MoCo school system cannot raise, parent, feed, house and teach every child who has uninvolved parents and expect good test scores. Whether that's due to parents' lack of skills, education, language ability, income, common sense or whatever. There will never be enough money, resources, or people to raise other people's many children.

MCPS is a large, heterogeneous public school system. While it exists for your child, it does not exist solely for your child, or for children like your child. It also exists for the children of lots of people who are not like you. Even if you wish it didn't.

Lower standards doesn't help kids struggling. At least before with acceleration being offered there was actual data to prove that there is a problem and the achievement gap needs to be addressed. MCPS is addressing it by trying to hide it . If they lower the measurements at the top they lesson the gap. This serves ONLY one group and that is MCPS.

My biggest complaint against Starr and the ineptitude of MCPS is that they fail the community that needs educational opportunities the most but is less vocal. The kids from less affluent areas are failing at higher proportions than the kids at the top. The constant (I mean constant) repetition of 2.0 is not going to help these kids. They need quality one on one time with an educator. They need regular feedback and they need reward/recognition/motivation to achieve. All kids need this but especially the at risk kids. Starr decided to increase class size and adversely affect student:educator ratios to buy off the teacher's union for support. Nice job.

Starr and MCPS does not serve this population at all. They only claim to serve them because the parents from lower SES areas are too busy trying to put food on the table to voice complaints about this inept school system. It disgusting what MCPS is doing.

I call it like it is.

An idiot is an idiot. There's no getting around that, hon.

Again, if you are FAMILIAR with CC standards, you understand how rigorous they are. I work with the ELA standards (high school). And whether you like it or not (or even believe me), I am developing curriculum for another school system. Thus far, all my units have been approved and plans have been set for future trainings.

The CC standards focus on critical thinking and discourse. Literacy is integrated throughout ALL content areas, and introducing non-fiction is now the norm for ALL content area teachers.

To question a decision WHEN you've done your research is one thing. To question a decision w/o knowing much makes you look like an idiot.

And I've come full circle!

voila!

Enjoy your summer!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Policies that don't group kids according to ability. Ones that lets the top kids languish as they will do fine on tests anyway. Bringing up the bottom to the exclusion of meeting the needs of everyone else.

exactly where is the proof that this is happening?? I've yet to see any real evidence except for ancedotal comments.

Hey citation monkey. Walk yourself over and sit in a classroom and see for yourself who is getting taught and who is not.
We did last year while house searching. Do the school tours! Talk to parents who actually ask their kid what happened in school today. Talk to parents that have to give their kids workbooks to do in class, on their own, while they wait for underperformers to pass/get proficient. At to all the area tutoring agencies on how much increased activity they are getting.

MoCo has been going downhill for awhile. No testing moratorium can cover it up. Starr wants the fed money, hired Pearson to come up with a curriculum aimed at bottom performers and ESOL, and taxes are going up more and more.

Pearson came with Weast, idiot.

And to say that Common Core, which drives Curriculum 2.0, is dumbing down is ridiculous. If you worked with CC standards (I have) and if you've written curriculum using CC (I have), you'd understand that these standards are very complex and rigorous.

But maybe they're too difficult for YOU to grasp?

classy rebuttal and diction. exactly who I'd want allegedly writing my child's so-called curriculum.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

It is just what I, and others, have said. Stop embarrassing yourself.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Blogs/Education-Matters/January-February-2013/MCPS-Superintendent-Says-Mixed-Ability-Grouping-is-Here-to-Stay/

"MCPS Superintendent Says Mixed-Ability Grouping is Here to Stay"

1. The article says, "He acknowledged that there may be legitimate reasons for grouping students by ability at times, but he came down solidly against the practice as a “wholesale policy.”"
2. "Tracking" is not necessarily the same as "ability grouping", and "mixed-ability grouping" is not the same as "everybody gets the same thing always".
2. He's right about tracking. Tracking children may or may not be good for children who have affluent, educated parents and no disabilities. It is absolutely terrible for children who don't. Now, you may say, "I'm not sacrificing my child's education to some abstract idea of social justice!" and I would agree with you. That is why I live in Montgomery County instead of DC. But, on the other hand, you know what else isn't good for your child? Living in a society with a lot of income inequality and inequality of opportunity. And I say this not (just) for reasons of social justice, but because societies with a lot of income inequality and inequality of opportunity are economically less productive and politically more unstable.

MCPS is a large, heterogeneous public school system. While it exists for your child, it does not exist solely for your child, or for children like your child. It also exists for the children of lots of people who are not like you. Even if you wish it didn't.

AMEN!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

It is just what I, and others, have said. Stop embarrassing yourself.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Blogs/Education-Matters/January-February-2013/MCPS-Superintendent-Says-Mixed-Ability-Grouping-is-Here-to-Stay/

"MCPS Superintendent Says Mixed-Ability Grouping is Here to Stay"

MCPS is a large, heterogeneous public school system. While it exists for your child, it does not exist solely for your child, or for children like your child. It also exists for the children of lots of people who are not like you. Even if you wish it didn't.

We've seen what Starr has said he would do, we've seen what he has done and we're seeing what the results are as well. He's imposed his "progressive" vision of more mixed-ability grouping and the impact has been one of the biggest drops in test scores in the state. MCPS currently does not exist for benefit of anyone's child, it exists so that Starr can impose his vision of "public ed for social justice", actually educating the kids damned in favor of an attempt at progressive social engineering.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

It is just what I, and others, have said. Stop embarrassing yourself.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Blogs/Education-Matters/January-February-2013/MCPS-Superintendent-Says-Mixed-Ability-Grouping-is-Here-to-Stay/

"MCPS Superintendent Says Mixed-Ability Grouping is Here to Stay"

1. The article says, "He acknowledged that there may be legitimate reasons for grouping students by ability at times, but he came down solidly against the practice as a “wholesale policy.”"
2. "Tracking" is not necessarily the same as "ability grouping", and "mixed-ability grouping" is not the same as "everybody gets the same thing always".
2. He's right about tracking. Tracking children may or may not be good for children who have affluent, educated parents and no disabilities. It is absolutely terrible for children who don't. Now, you may say, "I'm not sacrificing my child's education to some abstract idea of social justice!" and I would agree with you. That is why I live in Montgomery County instead of DC. But, on the other hand, you know what else isn't good for your child? Living in a society with a lot of income inequality and inequality of opportunity. And I say this not (just) for reasons of social justice, but because societies with a lot of income inequality and inequality of opportunity are economically less productive and politically more unstable.

MCPS is a large, heterogeneous public school system. While it exists for your child, it does not exist solely for your child, or for children like your child. It also exists for the children of lots of people who are not like you. Even if you wish it didn't.

Anonymous wrote:

This article refers to his time at Stamford. When, according to the article, "There were up to five tracks in the middle schools. Although only 40% of all students in the district were White, nearly 79% of the honors track was White. Conversely, although 53% of the district’s students were Black or Latino, only 11% of the honors track was Black or Latino. In the three lowest tracks, however, about 73% of the students were Black or Latino. It was as if two separate school systems existed."

So Starr eliminated a "rigid tracking system that was responsible for de-facto segregation". (Is this what we have in MCPS? Is this you want in MCPS?) And what happened? "State test scores went up for all subgroups, with accelerated growth for Black and Latino students. A survey of parents, students, and teachers showed positive reactions to the reform. The percentage of Black or Latino students in the honors math track increased from 11% to 30%—a dramatic shift in the proportion of student groups in the highest track."

If you are using this quote from this article to show that Starr believes all students should be lumped in the same classroom -- well, no, it doesn't show that.

We do not have de facto segregation in MCPS? de facto segregation in MCPS by zip code? I bet you can count the number of Black and Latino students in the MCPS classrooms of Mr. Starr's children on a single hand with a missing finger. So much for liberal mumbo jumbo philosophy.

I agree that we have de facto segregation in MCPS. I'm not sure what that has to do with "liberal mumbo jumbo" philosophy, though.