Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Me too. Stupid people unite!!

There are NO stupid people in Montgomery County.

I'm sorry to disappoint you.

But SUCCESS for EVERY STUDENT!

the Seven Keys!

college-readiness!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Me too. Stupid people unite!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don't get it. If "MCPS identifies tons and tons of kids as GT - more so than could possibly be "gifted" in a usual sense of the word" isn't that a problem? It looks like you are saying they include kids who can work above grade level. Its like more than 50% in some schools right? How can you make sense of that?

Reading recommendations for you:

...

Once you finish reading you can come back for questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Can you please define "the smart people"? Does it involve IQ testing?

I am not sure what you mean by IQ

But I think it is jsut a bunch of helicopter parents who think their kid is smart and want to push them harder because they never reached the same level.

but all dumb poeple show up to the meeting and bring beer

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Can you please define "the smart people"? Does it involve IQ testing?

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Anonymous wrote:I am going to this meeting just to annoy the smart people

Anonymous wrote:
I don't get it. If "MCPS identifies tons and tons of kids as GT - more so than could possibly be "gifted" in a usual sense of the word" isn't that a problem? It looks like you are saying they include kids who can work above grade level. Its like more than 50% in some schools right? How can you make sense of that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a written policy that eliminates the homogeneous pull-outs for advanced students under Curriculum 2.0?

MCPS policy for Gifted Children guides providing appropriate challenge for advanced students. Curriculum 2.0 should follow the policy. It is the implementation where the breakdown happens. There is no tool defined in Curriculum 2.0 framework yet to assess students mastery over the skills, no path defined for acceleration and it is left to the local school to figure out. Local schools often are taking the easy route and saying Curriculum 2.0 ties their hands to no acceleration. The central office does not monitor the schools for adherance to the MCPS Gifted Education policy and hence finally the advanced student suffer.

What is the difference between an advanced student and a GT student? I'm confused by all the labels.

Its one and the same in MCPS. MCPS identifies a wide range of advanced learners as GT.

That's the problem!!!! "Wide range of advanced learners as GT?" So, GT is a heterogeneous group? Is anyone advocating for clarity?

At Takoma Park ES we have a magnet program for GT kids (you can call Mrs. Jean Hockman, Magnet Coordinator, at (301) 650-6414). GT kids get sent to magnets and some of them don't get in because of space limits. They'll recommend you for the test or you can ask for it. There is a piece in the newspaper about GT http://washingtonexaminer.com/local/2008/09/gifted-and-talented-abounds-suburban-schools/31062

Its eye opening!!!

Anonymous wrote:"That's the problem!!!! "Wide range of advanced learners as GT?" So, GT is a heterogeneous group? Is anyone advocating for clarity? "

Read some of the other threads related to the forum. This has gone round in circles with the main upshot being...
1) yes, MCPS identifies tons and tons of kids as GT - more so than could possibly be "gifted" in a usual sense of the word. But that is their policy apparently.
2) A very very small % of those kids get to go to HGC/magnets.
3) The rest stay in their home schools.
4) It is critical home schools develope a way to appropriate challenge those kids remaining that work above grade level, particularly in schools with widely varying ability levels in classes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a written policy that eliminates the homogeneous pull-outs for advanced students under Curriculum 2.0?

MCPS policy for Gifted Children guides providing appropriate challenge for advanced students. Curriculum 2.0 should follow the policy. It is the implementation where the breakdown happens. There is no tool defined in Curriculum 2.0 framework yet to assess students mastery over the skills, no path defined for acceleration and it is left to the local school to figure out. Local schools often are taking the easy route and saying Curriculum 2.0 ties their hands to no acceleration. The central office does not monitor the schools for adherance to the MCPS Gifted Education policy and hence finally the advanced student suffer.

What is the difference between an advanced student and a GT student? I'm confused by all the labels.

Its one and the same in MCPS. MCPS identifies a wide range of advanced learners as GT.

That's the problem!!!! "Wide range of advanced learners as GT?" So, GT is a heterogeneous group? Is anyone advocating for clarity?