Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am tired of seeing teachers (or whoever you are) say things like "you can't criticize the schools/curriculm, because you're not a teacher". That's ridiculous. We can judge outcomes, and teaching is not that complicated. If you saw a doctor who had bad outcomes over and over again, you would certainly draw conclusions about that. If you saw a plumber getting worse results using a new technique, you would question that new technique.
I have no opinion about group work *generally*, though I certainly have seen it used as a way to occupy kids' time while not actually teaching them anything. But this notion that parents shouldn't question or criticize because we aren't the "experts" is ridiculous.

Luckily nobody has said that here.

And yes, teaching actually is that complicated. Please read the linked piece on math education. Or this piece:

http://www.veanea.org/home/2254.htm

What's more, people would never say, "I've used indoor plumbing all my life. I know all about plumbing. What's so complicated about plumbing?" Or "My electrician said that I needed a bigger circuit breaker panel, but I know that's ridiculous, because I've turned light bulbs on and off for decades." But somehow, if you've spent enough years in school, you think you know all about teaching.

Further, one of the questions is whether the educational outcomes actually are worse with the new curriculum. And I don't think parent complaints constitute proof of worse educational outcomes.

Yes, actually, people are saying that here. They are saying parents' opinions are wrong because parents aren't "experts" in education. But I have not seen a good basis in research or logic for many of the things MCPS is doing these days. I most certainly AM an expert in social science research, so I can certainly judge that quite well. And the notion that you have to have an ed degree, or be a teacher, to know that giving Ipads to kindergarteners, or teaching math primarily through word problems when kids are still learning to read and write, or, for that matter, removing the emphasis on handwriting at all, and removing acceleration (I could go on, of course) is wrongheaded. If you can show me something compelling that says otherwise, then I'm happy to read it. I'd love to feel better about this situation. But simply saying "well, parents aren't experts, leave it to the experts" doesn't fly. These "experts" don't seem to have a great handle on their "expertise".
Your analogy to the electrician or plumber isn't logical. As a reasonably educated person, I can certainly say "Hm, the electrician used to use grounded sockets for our kitchen appliances, and these new outlets aren't grounded. That seems fishy. I'm going to look into that. Hmmm.., let's see, this copy of the electrical code says we should have grounded sockets for all appliances. I better mention that to the electrician, and if he acts defensive about it, I'd better get a different electrician."
That's much more analogous.

Anonymous wrote:Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

Why aren't the math majors applying for jobs teaching math to elementary school students? The schools would hire them if they'd just apply!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

I don't understand your point. Education majors are too stupid to teach math? If you know math, you know how to teach math? IQ scores by college major on "statisticsbrain.com" provides definitive proof?

Also, did you know that many education programs require double majors in education and the subject matter (math, for example)? True fact.

NP here. Since you all are talking about teaching math and 2.0, this article may be of interest:

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-whats-keeping-americans-from-excelling-at-math-2014-7

Anonymous wrote:Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

I don't understand your point. Education majors are too stupid to teach math? If you know math, you know how to teach math? IQ scores by college major on "statisticsbrain.com" provides definitive proof?

Also, did you know that many education programs require double majors in education and the subject matter (math, for example)? True fact.

Anonymous wrote:

I am tired of seeing teachers (or whoever you are) say things like "you can't criticize the schools/curriculm, because you're not a teacher". That's ridiculous. We can judge outcomes, and teaching is not that complicated. If you saw a doctor who had bad outcomes over and over again, you would certainly draw conclusions about that. If you saw a plumber getting worse results using a new technique, you would question that new technique.
I have no opinion about group work *generally*, though I certainly have seen it used as a way to occupy kids' time while not actually teaching them anything. But this notion that parents shouldn't question or criticize because we aren't the "experts" is ridiculous.

Luckily nobody has said that here.

And yes, teaching actually is that complicated. Please read the linked piece on math education. Or this piece:

http://www.veanea.org/home/2254.htm

What's more, people would never say, "I've used indoor plumbing all my life. I know all about plumbing. What's so complicated about plumbing?" Or "My electrician said that I needed a bigger circuit breaker panel, but I know that's ridiculous, because I've turned light bulbs on and off for decades." But somehow, if you've spent enough years in school, you think you know all about teaching.

Further, one of the questions is whether the educational outcomes actually are worse with the new curriculum. And I don't think parent complaints constitute proof of worse educational outcomes.

Anonymous wrote:My thoughts on MCPS:

I don't care for the new grading system, but Curriculum 2.0 doesn't really bother me.

Acceleration does exist in the system--my DC will be in compacted math next year (1.5 years of math taught during one school year.)

Prior to MCPS, my DC was in a private school. I will say it was more rigorous, but the opportunity for acceleration wasn't there.

If I had to rate MCPS on a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a solid 7. It's decent.

PP, without identifying your school, could you give us an idea of its rigor and to put your remark in context? Ie, you could say
- it's one of the top MD/DC privates Sidwell, GDS, Landon, Stone Ridge
OR it's a well regarded MD private like Bullis, Norwood, St Andrew's, WES
OR it's a parochial school in my parish OR
it's a rigorous religious private a la Woods Academy, Georgetown Prep, Stone Ridge

How is 1.5 years of math in one year not acceleration? Whether you like the curriculum or not is another story but you can't say there is no acceleration. Your child will get to calculus in grade 11. What were you aiming for?

Also, I will add that pre-2.0 my DD map-r went down over the course of 4th grade at a HGC. Maybe she was totally on task for the first one and really tired for the second. Who knows? Not just a 2.0 issue..

Acceleration does exist in the system--my DC will be in compacted math next year (1.5 years of math taught during one school year.)

My child will be in compacted math next year also. This is after 3 years of doing NOTHING. 1.5 years of faster goofy math is not acceleration or rigorous math.

My thoughts on MCPS:

I don't care for the new grading system, but Curriculum 2.0 doesn't really bother me.

Acceleration does exist in the system--my DC will be in compacted math next year (1.5 years of math taught during one school year.)

Prior to MCPS, my DC was in a private school. I will say it was more rigorous, but the opportunity for acceleration wasn't there.

If I had to rate MCPS on a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a solid 7. It's decent.

Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Sadly, neither are most teachers. Stop pretending it's neurosurgery. It isn't. As an educated parent, I can tell whether the classroom is well managed or not. I can tell whether the kids are being taught effectively or not. That B.A in education doesn't make you uniquely able to discern those things.

I don't have a B.A. in education, thanks. In fact, I'm not a teacher.

Yes, teaching is not neurosurgery. What teaching is, is:

1. a set of skills
2. an empirical body of knowledge

If you are an educated parent, that means that you have a lot of experience being a student. It doesn't mean that you know the best ways to teach reading to kindergarteners, or fractions to third-graders, or stoichiometry to tenth graders.

For example, here is an article from this week's Sunday New York Times magazine about teaching math:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/magazine/why-do-americans-stink-at-math.html?_r=0

Is that how you learned math? Would the PP who started this discussion, and complained that group work is not instruction, be happy to see these teaching techniques in action?

I am tired of seeing teachers (or whoever you are) say things like "you can't criticize the schools/curriculm, because you're not a teacher". That's ridiculous. We can judge outcomes, and teaching is not that complicated. If you saw a doctor who had bad outcomes over and over again, you would certainly draw conclusions about that. If you saw a plumber getting worse results using a new technique, you would question that new technique.
I have no opinion about group work *generally*, though I certainly have seen it used as a way to occupy kids' time while not actually teaching them anything. But this notion that parents shouldn't question or criticize because we aren't the "experts" is ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:

Sadly, neither are most teachers. Stop pretending it's neurosurgery. It isn't. As an educated parent, I can tell whether the classroom is well managed or not. I can tell whether the kids are being taught effectively or not. That B.A in education doesn't make you uniquely able to discern those things.

I don't have a B.A. in education, thanks. In fact, I'm not a teacher.

Yes, teaching is not neurosurgery. What teaching is, is:

1. a set of skills
2. an empirical body of knowledge

If you are an educated parent, that means that you have a lot of experience being a student. It doesn't mean that you know the best ways to teach reading to kindergarteners, or fractions to third-graders, or stoichiometry to tenth graders.

For example, here is an article from this week's Sunday New York Times magazine about teaching math:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/magazine/why-do-americans-stink-at-math.html?_r=0

Is that how you learned math? Would the PP who started this discussion, and complained that group work is not instruction, be happy to see these teaching techniques in action?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Likewise, there was always group work pre-2.0, because it allowed the teacher to focus on small groups.

I am not the PP to whom you are responding, and I can only respond based on our child's personal MAP scores. (Countywide MAP scores are not available as far as I know, although someone could try to get the data thru some kind of FOIA request.)

My child was accelerated one year above grade level prior to the introduction of C2.0. Once C2.0 was introduced ALL students who had been accelerated were pulled off acceleration and put back in on grade level classes. The on grade level C2.0 math was touted by the principal as "deeper" than the prior non-C2.0 math. It was not. I carefully monitored all homework and assessments that came home. The C2.0 class did not offer anything different than the previous year's non-C2.0 math.

At the end of the year, my child's MAP scores, in terms of percentiles, declined.

I agree with the poster who said that the schools try not to give the MAP data. Our school would never give it, until I made a specific written request. Sometimes I even had to remind teachers that it was my right to see the MAP data and various break-outs that the teachers can see but never hand out to parents.

My childs MAP scores declined in absolute terms (not percentiles) from the end of 4th to the end of 5th. From the top of my head she went from a 243 MAP-R at the end of 4th to a 241 at the end of 5th. Even more interesting is that her scores declined during the year in 5th grade; I.e. she was at a 248 (I think?) at the start, a 243 mid-year and a 241 at the end.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

Likewise, there was always group work pre-2.0, because it allowed the teacher to focus on small groups.

I am not the PP to whom you are responding, and I can only respond based on our child's personal MAP scores. (Countywide MAP scores are not available as far as I know, although someone could try to get the data thru some kind of FOIA request.)

My child was accelerated one year above grade level prior to the introduction of C2.0. Once C2.0 was introduced ALL students who had been accelerated were pulled off acceleration and put back in on grade level classes. The on grade level C2.0 math was touted by the principal as "deeper" than the prior non-C2.0 math. It was not. I carefully monitored all homework and assessments that came home. The C2.0 class did not offer anything different than the previous year's non-C2.0 math.

At the end of the year, my child's MAP scores, in terms of percentiles, declined.

I agree with the poster who said that the schools try not to give the MAP data. Our school would never give it, until I made a specific written request. Sometimes I even had to remind teachers that it was my right to see the MAP data and various break-outs that the teachers can see but never hand out to parents.

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.

Sadly, neither are most teachers. Stop pretending it's neurosurgery. It isn't. As an educated parent, I can tell whether the classroom is well managed or not. I can tell whether the kids are being taught effectively or not. That B.A in education doesn't make you uniquely able to discern those things.