Anonymous wrote:Whatever your opinion about the remedies that Dan Reed floated in his opinion piece in the WashPo of a couple weeks back - he raised serious questions worthy of discussion/debate. The arrogance in Dr. Starr's initial (off-the-cuff, uncanned and therefore more authentic?) response blew me away:
When speaking at the Silver Spring Citizens Advisory Board, Dr. Starr was asked what he thought of the Dan Reed piece. Dr. Starr's response: "There's no shortage of self-professed experts on education because they went to school."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I myself am a big supporter of unions in general as a way to guarantee worker rights, etc. But I dislike MCEA's drive to get rid of differentiation and its leaders' inability to see that we have to close the achievement gap without lowering standards and leaving highly able kids to languish.
Obviously yes, Starr, MCEA, the Board of Education, and MCPS in general are interested in closing the achievement gap -- as we all should be.
But how are they advocating using lower standards as a strategy for closing the achievement gap? How are they advocating leaving highly-able kids to languish (!) as a strategy for closing the achievement gap?
And even if they actually did have a secret malign agenda to do this, what would happen? The numbers would come out, and everybody would immediately see that the reason the achievement gap was smaller was not because the lower-scoring groups were scoring higher, but because the higher-scoring groups were scoring lower. Do you think that they are too foolish or too incompetent to realize this?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I myself am a big supporter of unions in general as a way to guarantee worker rights, etc. But I dislike MCEA's drive to get rid of differentiation and its leaders' inability to see that we have to close the achievement gap without lowering standards and leaving highly able kids to languish.
Obviously yes, Starr, MCEA, the Board of Education, and MCPS in general are interested in closing the achievement gap -- as we all should be.
But how are they advocating using lower standards as a strategy for closing the achievement gap? How are they advocating leaving highly-able kids to languish (!) as a strategy for closing the achievement gap?
And even if they actually did have a secret malign agenda to do this, what would happen? The numbers would come out, and everybody would immediately see that the reason the achievement gap was smaller was not because the lower-scoring groups were scoring higher, but because the higher-scoring groups were scoring lower. Do you think that they are too foolish or too incompetent to realize this?
Anonymous wrote:I myself am a big supporter of unions in general as a way to guarantee worker rights, etc. But I dislike MCEA's drive to get rid of differentiation and its leaders' inability to see that we have to close the achievement gap without lowering standards and leaving highly able kids to languish.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think he doesn't listen, has a very high opinion of his own very trendy opinions and approaches, and is dismissive of parent concerns. Arrogance isn't just a personality flaw for someone in a position like this: it should be a deal-breaker. And if I hear about social-emotional intelligence once more I'm going to scream. What does that even mean, in the context of academic learning?
Dear God, honey! Look it up! It's does indeed mean quite a bit, especially for low performers.
And I can't STAND Starr!
Here, hon! I did the research for you.
http://casel.org/wp-content/uploads/EDC_CASELSELResearchBrief.pdf
.
Please don't be so condescending. I know what it means; I should have been more clear. And I know there's a bunch of reseach about it -- I read it myself when Starr first came to town, and I know about CASEL.
But you know what? It's trendy and I think he's using it in place of more effective measures. It's not going to work to trumpet social emotional learning and couple it with attempts at multi-level differentiation within one classroom, particularly in the so-called red-zone. SEL isn't a substitute for academic rigor, good teacher instruction, and clear, well-thought out curriculum with tests and textbooks that match standards.
It's not gong to do my kid one bit of good that she learned about conflict resolution and yet isn't learning adequate algebra skills because teachers aren't properly trained in 2.0. I think it's a smokescreen. I heard that clearly when he spoke at the "town hall meeting" or whatever he called it on GT education. He implied that smart kids don't need challenging work, they just need some SEL training because all smart kids are a little odd.
EXACTLY RIGHT. Could not have said it better myself!
Anonymous wrote:Honest question from a relative new-comer: have parents liked any of the previous superintendents? Did parents like Weast? The school system is big and not everyone is going to be happy with the choices the superintendent makes. Are Starr's policies/choices radically different than what we would be seeing under different leadership?
Anonymous wrote:Honest question from a relative new-comer: have parents liked any of the previous superintendents? Did parents like Weast? The school system is big and not everyone is going to be happy with the choices the superintendent makes. Are Starr's policies/choices radically different than what we would be seeing under different leadership?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cannot stand that guy, he's so smarmy, arrogant and dismissive.
By all means, let's fire the school superintendent on grounds that he's smarmy.
He's arrogant and not at all compassionate.
a mediocre politician at best
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think he doesn't listen, has a very high opinion of his own very trendy opinions and approaches, and is dismissive of parent concerns. Arrogance isn't just a personality flaw for someone in a position like this: it should be a deal-breaker. And if I hear about social-emotional intelligence once more I'm going to scream. What does that even mean, in the context of academic learning?
Dear God, honey! Look it up! It's does indeed mean quite a bit, especially for low performers.
And I can't STAND Starr!
Here, hon! I did the research for you.
http://casel.org/wp-content/uploads/EDC_CASELSELResearchBrief.pdf
Anonymous wrote:This bio made me wretch:
http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/departments/superintendent/about/
It's so self-laudatory. Either he's full of himself, he's surrounded himself with sycophants who make him sound like Dear Leader, or both.
I don't care if he's a "lifelong learner" or if he picks up a guitar. I just want him to stop dumbing down MCPS so he can take credit from reducing an achievement gap before he trots off to DOE.