I had the impression that IB was not a good option for students who are interested in science - you seem to be saying something different.

Anonymous wrote:Science courses in the DP programme (IB) are fantastic! But that could be b/c of their international approach. They are asked to make sense of the facts. Many teachers of advanced science courses - honors and AP - focus on the facts and claim that the IB sciences are too touchy-feely, which isn't the case. These students do much better in their science college courses than their counterparts who took AP. (We often track their success.) So it's a mix of facts and critical thinking - at every step of the way, starting at the elementary level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your students are not Curriculum 2.0 babies. In fact, your students reflect the "older" content. So even when facts were emphasized in the instruction, they didn't make an impact on your current crew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Thanks for posting this - it is what I am seeing in 6th grade and I am starting to worry about when (if) dc will learn science properly. I teach college and I find that many MCPS students are not willing to spend the time to master the facts or the theory they need to completely understand before they embark on theory applications.

Good point! I wonder what the future holds. I completed my secondary and much of my post secondary education outside the U.S. and we were expected to first master the facts and theory and then apply them. Creativity and critical thinking were encouraged but you had to first demonstrate absolute mastery of the basics. What I find at the college level here is that my students either simply repeat what they see in the textbook or if I give them an open-ended question, they answer it by giving me their personal opinion without using a theoretical framework or referring to concepts they have learned in class. I keep wondering how they are taught in high school.

Science courses in the DP programme (IB) are fantastic! But that could be b/c of their international approach. They are asked to make sense of the facts. Many teachers of advanced science courses - honors and AP - focus on the facts and claim that the IB sciences are too touchy-feely, which isn't the case. These students do much better in their science college courses than their counterparts who took AP. (We often track their success.) So it's a mix of facts and critical thinking - at every step of the way, starting at the elementary level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your students are not Curriculum 2.0 babies. In fact, your students reflect the "older" content. So even when facts were emphasized in the instruction, they didn't make an impact on your current crew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Thanks for posting this - it is what I am seeing in 6th grade and I am starting to worry about when (if) dc will learn science properly. I teach college and I find that many MCPS students are not willing to spend the time to master the facts or the theory they need to completely understand before they embark on theory applications.

Good point! I wonder what the future holds. I completed my secondary and much of my post secondary education outside the U.S. and we were expected to first master the facts and theory and then apply them. Creativity and critical thinking were encouraged but you had to first demonstrate absolute mastery of the basics. What I find at the college level here is that my students either simply repeat what they see in the textbook or if I give them an open-ended question, they answer it by giving me their personal opinion without using a theoretical framework or referring to concepts they have learned in class. I keep wondering how they are taught in high school.

My 3rd grader isn't getting science either. Math/science teacher says she only has time for math.

Anonymous wrote:Your students are not Curriculum 2.0 babies. In fact, your students reflect the "older" content. So even when facts were emphasized in the instruction, they didn't make an impact on your current crew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Thanks for posting this - it is what I am seeing in 6th grade and I am starting to worry about when (if) dc will learn science properly. I teach college and I find that many MCPS students are not willing to spend the time to master the facts or the theory they need to completely understand before they embark on theory applications.

Good point! I wonder what the future holds. I completed my secondary and much of my post secondary education outside the U.S. and we were expected to first master the facts and theory and then apply them. Creativity and critical thinking were encouraged but you had to first demonstrate absolute mastery of the basics. What I find at the college level here is that my students either simply repeat what they see in the textbook or if I give them an open-ended question, they answer it by giving me their personal opinion without using a theoretical framework or referring to concepts they have learned in class. I keep wondering how they are taught in high school.

Your students are not Curriculum 2.0 babies. In fact, your students reflect the "older" content. So even when facts were emphasized in the instruction, they didn't make an impact on your current crew.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Thanks for posting this - it is what I am seeing in 6th grade and I am starting to worry about when (if) dc will learn science properly. I teach college and I find that many MCPS students are not willing to spend the time to master the facts or the theory they need to completely understand before they embark on theory applications.

I went to private school way back in the day when they taught the basics and we were expected to memorize facts.

To this day, I can't tell you the difference btw. an electron, proton and neutron. When I do math with my kid (who's in 2.0), and I see her struggling to explain the reason BEHIND the answer, I wish I had been taught in that manner, as I would have truly appreciated how math works and why it's important.

I am resourceful: I can find the answers. And I'm successful in my field. But basic recall means crap unless you help students develop the critical thinking to make meaning of the facts.

It's a balance, of course, and since 2.0 is new, there will be gaps and issues to address. Sadly, education is one area where "employees" are blasted for learning on the job. But that's where the learning has to occur - in the classroom - not just for students, but for teachers, too.

As parents, we should monitor our children's progress by finding the gaps and sometimes addressing them ourselves. That's being a resourceful parent!

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Thanks for posting this - it is what I am seeing in 6th grade and I am starting to worry about when (if) dc will learn science properly. I teach college and I find that many MCPS students are not willing to spend the time to master the facts or the theory they need to completely understand before they embark on theory applications.

Anonymous wrote:(I think that the PP at 16:10 was actually being sarcastic about the PP at 16:05, specifically the statement

Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

16:10 here and I was definitely being a smartass in response to the foolishness

(I think that the PP at 16:10 was actually being sarcastic about the PP at 16:05, specifically the statement

Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

"the real problem is that most parents are too stupid to know that the science their kids are being taught is not real science. "

you sound like an obnoxious person I'm glad I don't know. Many of us never specialized in science - and it may not have been our strong suit in school. Why would that make all non-science people "stupid" because we don't understand what science teaching "should" look like? Why don't you explain in detail what it should look like instead of just name calling and saying that whatever is happening now is not good. That's not helpful - it's just criticism. Some of us would appreciate learning what we don't know that we don't know.

I posted previously about a science class I observed yesterday that did seem to be a good example of learning about science. The students were designing an experiment, identifying a hypothesis, and were using scientific vocabulary (variable, mass, force). What do people find wrong with this model, or what do you think is missing? It seems to combine scientific knowledge with learning the scientific process. Granted, you can't learn much from observing one class, but I was more pleased than I expected to be.

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents expect science teaching to consist of learning science facts. Other parents expect science teaching to consist of doing science. Yet other parents expect science teaching to consist of a mixture of learning science facts and doing science. Even yet other parents don't particularly care, or would like to care but don't have the time and energy, or don't have the knowledge to have expectations.

(There, fixed that for you.)

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Spot on -- the real problem is that most parents are too stupid to know that the science their kids are being taught is not real science.
The whole lot of MCPS needs to be replaced with STEM geniuses that teach in exactly the way you see fit, because of course, no one else is as bright as you.
Congratulations on that, by the way!!

I don't think the problem is inconsistency among schools. Some parents see anything with a science theme and think great, they are learning science. Other parents see the science theme but realize the curriculum isn't teaching in a way that will prepare the kids to understand and do well in science down the road.

I love our 3rd grade teacher. She is amazing. They have fun science experiments and tests but I do see that these are all language based assignments.

My hope is that common core will test kids on actual science knowledge. If it does, MCPS will eventually respond and start teaching science. This will not help our kids but will help future kids. If common core doesn't test for science knowledge then there is a snowballs chance in hell for MCPS to ever adopt a quality STEM curriculum. Just not going to happen with all the clueless education/liberal arts people running the show.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe that's third grade. My middle school kid gets zero materials or hand-on work in science other than worksheets.

You either aren't in MCPS or you go to a very unusual MS. MS science curriculum in MCPS is awesome. Totally hands on, very varied and informative. I was completely and totally impressed when my oldest went through the MS curriculum.

I think not everyone has the same experience in MCPS. Our child's MS science for the last 3 years has been really appalling -- very weak teachers, real lack of rigor, very low expectations, very low level of reading in science texts, lab experiments have been weak.

I know that people may not want to name names, but I sure would love to know what schools these are.