Anonymous wrote:
One of my good friends in college was a math major. He was a brilliant student. He came into college with so many credits that he decided to double major in Russian just to slow himself down because he wanted to have 4 years of college. He completed graduate school in math in one year. He decided to become a math teacher because he had tutored so many math students and thought it was a greater challenge to teach math to struggling students than to be a math professor. (Not really sure what other jobs prospects there are for math majors) He now works in PG county.

Good for him. That's a nice story to read, thanks, PP!

I am guessing an elementary school library does not have enough of a non-fiction section to cover all of the topics chosen by 5th graders in a HGC.

Anonymous wrote:WHich center is that? My child actually had a field trip to the public library where they were required to use at least two actual books as sources for a research paper.

The best thing about MCPS centers is that the group of kids are truely gifted or advanced. FCPS includes so many kids (about 25%) that the curriculum is not very different from the regular kids.

But hope it works out better for you!

Why not use the school's library? What a waste of a field trip.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

Why aren't the math majors applying for jobs teaching math to elementary school students? The schools would hire them if they'd just apply!

No, they'd have to have teachers' certifications.

One of my good friends in college was a math major. He was a brilliant student. He came into college with so many credits that he decided to double major in Russian just to slow himself down because he wanted to have 4 years of college. He completed graduate school in math in one year. He decided to become a math teacher because he had tutored so many math students and thought it was a greater challenge to teach math to struggling students than to be a math professor. (Not really sure what other jobs prospects there are for math majors) He now works in PG county.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, actually, people are saying that here. They are saying parents' opinions are wrong because parents aren't "experts" in education. But I have not seen a good basis in research or logic for many of the things MCPS is doing these days. I most certainly AM an expert in social science research, so I can certainly judge that quite well. And the notion that you have to have an ed degree, or be a teacher, to know that giving Ipads to kindergarteners, or teaching math primarily through word problems when kids are still learning to read and write, or, for that matter, removing the emphasis on handwriting at all, and removing acceleration (I could go on, of course) is wrongheaded. If you can show me something compelling that says otherwise, then I'm happy to read it. I'd love to feel better about this situation. But simply saying "well, parents aren't experts, leave it to the experts" doesn't fly. These "experts" don't seem to have a great handle on their "expertise".
Your analogy to the electrician or plumber isn't logical. As a reasonably educated person, I can certainly say "Hm, the electrician used to use grounded sockets for our kitchen appliances, and these new outlets aren't grounded. That seems fishy. I'm going to look into that. Hmmm.., let's see, this copy of the electrical code says we should have grounded sockets for all appliances. I better mention that to the electrician, and if he acts defensive about it, I'd better get a different electrician."
That's much more analogous.

Who has said that, and what have they said it about?

The PP (I don't know if it was you or somebody else) who started this discussion about what parents know about teaching said, "If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom. "

Now, you are an expert in social science research. That means that you can look up the research on this. That PP's model of ideal teaching seems to be a teacher showing the whole class what to do and asking the whole class questions about it. Is that an effective way to teach? What does the research show about this method of teaching vs. letting students work on problems in small groups? We don't have to rely on parents' opinions about this. There is research.

Then there are also teachers' opinions, which are still opinions, but at least the informed opinions of people who have actually taught (as opposed to the uninformed opinions of non-teacher parents, who haven't).

The general feeling on DCUM seems to be that teachers are stupid, and teaching isn't all that hard anyway. If I came along and said, "Good grief, those social scientists, always using my tax dollars to come up with new studies that contradict the previous studies (or, alternatively, studies that demonstrate what everybody already knew), how hard can social science research be anyway, I could do better than that", what would your response be? Would you agree that public accountability is a good thing and that I am qualified to judge your methods and results?

whoa, crazy "educator" lady is over here too.
thx for the entertainment. your circular references, defensive nature, and attempts to show off are much appreciated.
maybe gates foundation will hire you for the big bucks.
or not.

Would someone define group work? Is this the teacher having a reading lesson with a small group of kids? Or is it a small group of kids working together on a project? Both seem to have value to me.. Do we think the whole day should be a whole group lesson? Small kids will never sit and listen for that long. You have to break it up.

Anonymous wrote:

Oh, and to answer your question -- read upthread. In response to the person who said that group work wasn't really teaching kids much, the person responded (repeatedly) that "most parents aren't experts in teaching". Obviously, they said that as a way of dismissing that opinion. It was said another time as well. It's a common refrain from the MCPS defenders. It's silly. In no other field do we say that you can't question the techniques because you don't have specialized knowledge. In other fields, the specialists explain/defend the techniques. MCPS doesn't, because in many cases, it can't.

Who is saying that you can't question the techniques? The point is that the typical non-teacher parent who hasn't read up on the subject doesn't have enough knowledge to evaluate whether or not the techniques are good -- but thinks they do, because they've spent a lot of time in school. When you go in for surgery, do you tell your anesthesiologist, "I can't believe you're using [this anesthetic], I've had surgery before and so I know that [this other anesthetic] is the one you should be using, you incompetent fool."? I can't think of any other profession besides teaching that everybody believes they know all about.

What part of the curriculum is mind boggling? I have not read the curriculum myself so I appreciate you summarizing for me.

Anonymous wrote:My thoughts are theyare lackluster, robotic, never thinking outside-the-box school district. More busy work than teaching because they don't track the kids. Smarter reading groups get ignored the most and kids as young as 5 who don't conform to sitting at a desk reading or doing worksheets are considered problem kids. The curriculum is mind boggling, the report cards useless, very little arts/music and paltry 30min of indoor PE a week.

Yes yes and yes!!!

Anonymous wrote:My thoughts on MCPS:

I don't care for the new grading system, but Curriculum 2.0 doesn't really bother me.

Acceleration does exist in the system--my DC will be in compacted math next year (1.5 years of math taught during one school year.)

Prior to MCPS, my DC was in a private school. I will say it was more rigorous, but the opportunity for acceleration wasn't there.

If I had to rate MCPS on a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a solid 7. It's decent.

That depends on the private. Parochials rarely advance. College prep schools do. One of my daughters is at a private and is very much accelerated and having all 3 levels under the same roof, kids can take classes 1-3yrs above their grade without a problem. That said, they won't accelerate unless there is 100% knowledge understanding. Something MCPS didn't really do before which is why kids in acceleration didn't memorize basic math facts and were struggling by 5th grade acceleration. The problems took too long.

MCPS doesn't, because in many cases, it can't.

Agree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, actually, people are saying that here. They are saying parents' opinions are wrong because parents aren't "experts" in education. But I have not seen a good basis in research or logic for many of the things MCPS is doing these days. I most certainly AM an expert in social science research, so I can certainly judge that quite well. And the notion that you have to have an ed degree, or be a teacher, to know that giving Ipads to kindergarteners, or teaching math primarily through word problems when kids are still learning to read and write, or, for that matter, removing the emphasis on handwriting at all, and removing acceleration (I could go on, of course) is wrongheaded. If you can show me something compelling that says otherwise, then I'm happy to read it. I'd love to feel better about this situation. But simply saying "well, parents aren't experts, leave it to the experts" doesn't fly. These "experts" don't seem to have a great handle on their "expertise".
Your analogy to the electrician or plumber isn't logical. As a reasonably educated person, I can certainly say "Hm, the electrician used to use grounded sockets for our kitchen appliances, and these new outlets aren't grounded. That seems fishy. I'm going to look into that. Hmmm.., let's see, this copy of the electrical code says we should have grounded sockets for all appliances. I better mention that to the electrician, and if he acts defensive about it, I'd better get a different electrician."
That's much more analogous.

Who has said that, and what have they said it about?

The PP (I don't know if it was you or somebody else) who started this discussion about what parents know about teaching said, "If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom. "

Now, you are an expert in social science research. That means that you can look up the research on this. That PP's model of ideal teaching seems to be a teacher showing the whole class what to do and asking the whole class questions about it. Is that an effective way to teach? What does the research show about this method of teaching vs. letting students work on problems in small groups? We don't have to rely on parents' opinions about this. There is research.

Then there are also teachers' opinions, which are still opinions, but at least the informed opinions of people who have actually taught (as opposed to the uninformed opinions of non-teacher parents, who haven't).

The general feeling on DCUM seems to be that teachers are stupid, and teaching isn't all that hard anyway. If I came along and said, "Good grief, those social scientists, always using my tax dollars to come up with new studies that contradict the previous studies (or, alternatively, studies that demonstrate what everybody already knew), how hard can social science research be anyway, I could do better than that", what would your response be? Would you agree that public accountability is a good thing and that I am qualified to judge your methods and results?

Oh, and to answer your question -- read upthread. In response to the person who said that group work wasn't really teaching kids much, the person responded (repeatedly) that "most parents aren't experts in teaching". Obviously, they said that as a way of dismissing that opinion. It was said another time as well. It's a common refrain from the MCPS defenders. It's silly. In no other field do we say that you can't question the techniques because you don't have specialized knowledge. In other fields, the specialists explain/defend the techniques. MCPS doesn't, because in many cases, it can't.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, actually, people are saying that here. They are saying parents' opinions are wrong because parents aren't "experts" in education. But I have not seen a good basis in research or logic for many of the things MCPS is doing these days. I most certainly AM an expert in social science research, so I can certainly judge that quite well. And the notion that you have to have an ed degree, or be a teacher, to know that giving Ipads to kindergarteners, or teaching math primarily through word problems when kids are still learning to read and write, or, for that matter, removing the emphasis on handwriting at all, and removing acceleration (I could go on, of course) is wrongheaded. If you can show me something compelling that says otherwise, then I'm happy to read it. I'd love to feel better about this situation. But simply saying "well, parents aren't experts, leave it to the experts" doesn't fly. These "experts" don't seem to have a great handle on their "expertise".
Your analogy to the electrician or plumber isn't logical. As a reasonably educated person, I can certainly say "Hm, the electrician used to use grounded sockets for our kitchen appliances, and these new outlets aren't grounded. That seems fishy. I'm going to look into that. Hmmm.., let's see, this copy of the electrical code says we should have grounded sockets for all appliances. I better mention that to the electrician, and if he acts defensive about it, I'd better get a different electrician."
That's much more analogous.

Who has said that, and what have they said it about?

The PP (I don't know if it was you or somebody else) who started this discussion about what parents know about teaching said, "If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom. "

Now, you are an expert in social science research. That means that you can look up the research on this. That PP's model of ideal teaching seems to be a teacher showing the whole class what to do and asking the whole class questions about it. Is that an effective way to teach? What does the research show about this method of teaching vs. letting students work on problems in small groups? We don't have to rely on parents' opinions about this. There is research.

Then there are also teachers' opinions, which are still opinions, but at least the informed opinions of people who have actually taught (as opposed to the uninformed opinions of non-teacher parents, who haven't).

The general feeling on DCUM seems to be that teachers are stupid, and teaching isn't all that hard anyway. If I came along and said, "Good grief, those social scientists, always using my tax dollars to come up with new studies that contradict the previous studies (or, alternatively, studies that demonstrate what everybody already knew), how hard can social science research be anyway, I could do better than that", what would your response be? Would you agree that public accountability is a good thing and that I am qualified to judge your methods and results?

Yes, of COURSE I would agree with that. People can, and should, question the work and results of people doing work that directly affects them. Would you say that people shouldn't question the work of economists? "Oh, the Fed raised interest rates! Well, I guess they know best, since I'm not an expert." No, that's not how the world works. People try to inform themselves and people do form opinions. I'm not the PP who advocated one teacher in front of the classroom. I was responding to the person whose response to that was to say that parent's aren't experts. Your notion that parents are "uninformed" is a problem. Sure, some are. But most around here aren't. And, honestly, the difference in education and experience level between me (a person who is NOT a teacher, but has taught at the college level and tutored at the elementary level) and a 3rd year teacher, is just not that great. I think I (and most parents around here) am capable of gleaning roughly what's going on in my kid's classroom, and using common sense to discern whether there is a basis for it or not. Often, we ask the teachers, and there is no answer.
I'm not in the camp that treats teachers like they're stupid. But I reject the usual response to that that "teachers know best". The truth is in the middle. Most teachers are trying hard and probably do a pretty good job. But most parents are capable of understanding the basics of teaching and noticing when things aren't being done well.
Would you tell a parent they're not expert enough to know that a teacher isn't doing it right when the teacher isn't implementing the terms of an IEP (a situation that occurs not infrequently in MCPS, as I'm sure you know). NO, right? So, at what point to you acknowledge that in some (many) instances, the parent is the person in the best position to judge what ought to be happening in the classroom for his/her child?

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, actually, people are saying that here. They are saying parents' opinions are wrong because parents aren't "experts" in education. But I have not seen a good basis in research or logic for many of the things MCPS is doing these days. I most certainly AM an expert in social science research, so I can certainly judge that quite well. And the notion that you have to have an ed degree, or be a teacher, to know that giving Ipads to kindergarteners, or teaching math primarily through word problems when kids are still learning to read and write, or, for that matter, removing the emphasis on handwriting at all, and removing acceleration (I could go on, of course) is wrongheaded. If you can show me something compelling that says otherwise, then I'm happy to read it. I'd love to feel better about this situation. But simply saying "well, parents aren't experts, leave it to the experts" doesn't fly. These "experts" don't seem to have a great handle on their "expertise".
Your analogy to the electrician or plumber isn't logical. As a reasonably educated person, I can certainly say "Hm, the electrician used to use grounded sockets for our kitchen appliances, and these new outlets aren't grounded. That seems fishy. I'm going to look into that. Hmmm.., let's see, this copy of the electrical code says we should have grounded sockets for all appliances. I better mention that to the electrician, and if he acts defensive about it, I'd better get a different electrician."
That's much more analogous.

Who has said that, and what have they said it about?

The PP (I don't know if it was you or somebody else) who started this discussion about what parents know about teaching said, "If school A has one or two teachers actively engaging the whole class for 45 minutes a subject, teaching and challenging then all with a topic that is considerably more value add than school Z that has a teacher engage the class for 15 minutes and then tell the students to figure it out in groups while she walks around and helps the bottom. "

Now, you are an expert in social science research. That means that you can look up the research on this. That PP's model of ideal teaching seems to be a teacher showing the whole class what to do and asking the whole class questions about it. Is that an effective way to teach? What does the research show about this method of teaching vs. letting students work on problems in small groups? We don't have to rely on parents' opinions about this. There is research.

Then there are also teachers' opinions, which are still opinions, but at least the informed opinions of people who have actually taught (as opposed to the uninformed opinions of non-teacher parents, who haven't).

The general feeling on DCUM seems to be that teachers are stupid, and teaching isn't all that hard anyway. If I came along and said, "Good grief, those social scientists, always using my tax dollars to come up with new studies that contradict the previous studies (or, alternatively, studies that demonstrate what everybody already knew), how hard can social science research be anyway, I could do better than that", what would your response be? Would you agree that public accountability is a good thing and that I am qualified to judge your methods and results?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go to statisticsbrain.com and look up IQs by college major. Guess what is on the bottom? Education. Guess what is on the top ? Math.

There is a huge gap in how math majors think compared to how education majors think. Now have education majors teach math. Not a good idea.

Why aren't the math majors applying for jobs teaching math to elementary school students? The schools would hire them if they'd just apply!

No, they'd have to have teachers' certifications.