Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They get money for special needs and for kids who are low income. I don't now about ESOL.

That's very interesting considering how horrible Sp.Ed students are treated, not to mention the lack of support to even have a functional and safe classroom. Is it possible to audit the school?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Which is the saddest part and why teachers and parents hate that the testing takes up so much time. These individual state exams are bogus. There needs to be one national test, given in key years(3,5, 7,9, and one for Algebra). After that there are PSAT/SAT, APs for HS. Take the MAP in Fall and Spring to show growth during the year and year to year. Done.

+100. MCAP is redundant with MAP/national testing and a terrible waste of what could have been ~12 hours of instruction time.

Also that is ridiculous it took an entire year to get results.

Are these the same people who say that kids should get a "break" in late May and early June?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Which is the saddest part and why teachers and parents hate that the testing takes up so much time. These individual state exams are bogus. There needs to be one national test, given in key years(3,5, 7,9, and one for Algebra). After that there are PSAT/SAT, APs for HS. Take the MAP in Fall and Spring to show growth during the year and year to year. Done.

+100. MCAP is redundant with MAP/national testing and a terrible waste of what could have been ~12 hours of instruction time.

Also that is ridiculous it took an entire year to get results.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Which is the saddest part and why teachers and parents hate that the testing takes up so much time. These individual state exams are bogus. There needs to be one national test, given in key years(3,5, 7,9, and one for Algebra). After that there are PSAT/SAT, APs for HS. Take the MAP in Fall and Spring to show growth during the year and year to year. Done.

+100. MCAP is redundant with MAP/national testing and a terrible waste of what could have been ~12 hours of instruction time.

Also that is ridiculous it took an entire year to get results.

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Which is the saddest part and why teachers and parents hate that the testing takes up so much time. These individual state exams are bogus. There needs to be one national test, given in key years(3,5, 7,9, and one for Algebra). After that there are PSAT/SAT, APs for HS. Take the MAP in Fall and Spring to show growth during the year and year to year. Done.

Anonymous wrote:

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Yes, I think so. if your child's MCAP scores are way out of whack from what you're expecting -- for example, she's getting good grades in reading but MCAP says she's not proficient -- that's worth clarifying with your school. But I don't think you can reasonably make instructional changes based on MCAP because they're so delayed.

Is it more to see how the school is doing, on average?

Anonymous wrote:They get money for special needs and for kids who are low income. I don't now about ESOL.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly feel that schools need to focus on EDUCATION. There are plenty of other government agencies and non-profits who can do the rest.

Schools can’t do everything. Focus on one thing (teaching kids) and let other organizations handle the rest.

From an efficiency and value for money standpoint, it makes a lot of sense to serve kids where they are physically located. If you want to be sure kids get a healthy breakfast and lunch, then serving it to them directly conserves valuable resources and limits opportunities for fraud/misuse.

Similarly, embedding medical clinics in the highest needs schools saves taxpayer resources because the children are already there, elementary schools tend to be walking distance to homes, and schools can function as a distribution hub.

What I think folks fail to understand, however, is that MCPS funds are largely not going to those items. Free and reduced price breakfasts and lunches come from federal funds, while money for social services or medical care is a mix of federal/state/county funds. It's not being diverted from education - it's just being physically delivered in the place where kids/families are anyway.

I thought the bulk of MCPS funds went to fund central office bloat?

People complain about central office bloat and the McPS budget but apparently have failed to do any real math calculations. Like the fact the district has 26K employees and 150K+ students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly feel that schools need to focus on EDUCATION. There are plenty of other government agencies and non-profits who can do the rest.

Schools can’t do everything. Focus on one thing (teaching kids) and let other organizations handle the rest.

From an efficiency and value for money standpoint, it makes a lot of sense to serve kids where they are physically located. If you want to be sure kids get a healthy breakfast and lunch, then serving it to them directly conserves valuable resources and limits opportunities for fraud/misuse.

Similarly, embedding medical clinics in the highest needs schools saves taxpayer resources because the children are already there, elementary schools tend to be walking distance to homes, and schools can function as a distribution hub.

What I think folks fail to understand, however, is that MCPS funds are largely not going to those items. Free and reduced price breakfasts and lunches come from federal funds, while money for social services or medical care is a mix of federal/state/county funds. It's not being diverted from education - it's just being physically delivered in the place where kids/families are anyway.

I thought the bulk of MCPS funds went to fund central office bloat?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly feel that schools need to focus on EDUCATION. There are plenty of other government agencies and non-profits who can do the rest.

Schools can’t do everything. Focus on one thing (teaching kids) and let other organizations handle the rest.

From an efficiency and value for money standpoint, it makes a lot of sense to serve kids where they are physically located. If you want to be sure kids get a healthy breakfast and lunch, then serving it to them directly conserves valuable resources and limits opportunities for fraud/misuse.

Similarly, embedding medical clinics in the highest needs schools saves taxpayer resources because the children are already there, elementary schools tend to be walking distance to homes, and schools can function as a distribution hub.

What I think folks fail to understand, however, is that MCPS funds are largely not going to those items. Free and reduced price breakfasts and lunches come from federal funds, while money for social services or medical care is a mix of federal/state/county funds. It's not being diverted from education - it's just being physically delivered in the place where kids/families are anyway.