Anonymous wrote:Or put it into your column of "curriculum 2.0 is awful"
Anonymous wrote:
There is a lot of evidence that bright kids aren't accommodated at our school, and it's one of the "best" in the county. Wish I understood that back when the HGC forms came home.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Who cares, the focus is on bringing up the bottom, not challenging every level including the top.
That seems true. I actually think that the system is fine. HGC is available for the kids who really need it and I've seen no evidence that the other bright kids aren't accommodated.
There is a lot of evidence that bright kids aren't accommodated at our school, and it's one of the "best" in the county. Wish I understood that back when the HGC forms came home.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Who cares, the focus is on bringing up the bottom, not challenging every level including the top.
That seems true. I actually think that the system is fine. HGC is available for the kids who really need it and I've seen no evidence that the other bright kids aren't accommodated.
Anonymous wrote:Who cares, the focus is on bringing up the bottom, not challenging every level including the top.
Anonymous wrote:Who cares, the focus is on bringing up the bottom, not challenging every level including the top.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
At what level? The HGC level?
The 30% who test as gifted (MCPS terminology) cannot work at the HGC level. That is not what the designation means.
Actually I think that a lot more than 3% could work at the HGC level. For every child at my child's school who got into the HGC, there was at least one child who would have done fine at the HGC but didn't get in.
Some kids need to be in the HGC (and hopefully they get in). Some kids could probably do the work but don't need to be there. I think that is an important factor in admissions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
At what level? The HGC level?
The 30% who test as gifted (MCPS terminology) cannot work at the HGC level. That is not what the designation means.
Actually I think that a lot more than 3% could work at the HGC level. For every child at my child's school who got into the HGC, there was at least one child who would have done fine at the HGC but didn't get in.
Some kids need to be in the HGC (and hopefully they get in). Some kids could probably do the work but don't need to be there. I think that is an important factor in admissions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
At what level? The HGC level?
The 30% who test as gifted (MCPS terminology) cannot work at the HGC level. That is not what the designation means.
Actually I think that a lot more than 3% could work at the HGC level. For every child at my child's school who got into the HGC, there was at least one child who would have done fine at the HGC but didn't get in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
At what level? The HGC level?
The 30% who test as gifted (MCPS terminology) cannot work at the HGC level. That is not what the designation means.
Actually I think that a lot more than 3% could work at the HGC level. For every child at my child's school who got into the HGC, there was at least one child who would have done fine at the HGC but didn't get in.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
There is nothing in the MCPS model that allows an advanced student to help a struggling student. Its a teacher centric model. The kids struggling just see that others can do something that they can't, they get no benefit other than a hit to self esteem. The only person in the room that benefits from the way MCPS is doing this is the teacher. She gets a class where at least 30% of the students require no instruction and hands her positive test scores. She just has to discipline them to stay in their seats. She only has to teach the rest of the class.
What school are you in? That's not how it works at our school.