Anonymous wrote:I agree that TOTM can be poorly implemented (what program can't?), but I feel -- in my child's instance -- after 1.5 years with good teachers, he and his classmates, most of whom are low-income, will be on equally steady footing for K. Not only will they 'know' the basics - alphabet, simple math, sight words, but more importantly they've all been through the 'self-regulation' drills for two years, which really helps the kids with all aspects of behavior.

When I toured Cleveland (last year) they had only 1 classroom using TOTM and while the teacher might have been good, she couldn't articulate why she was doing what she was doing. I had the impression she had gotten 2 days of training and then no support / back-up and that the administration was at all committed to the program. I think TOTM works best when all classes do it, it has administration support, and teachers can share ideas and resources.

If your child knows letters, simple math and sight words then your child's teacher DID NOT implement TOTM correctly. Probably your child's teacher "sneaked in the basics" like most good teachers do. And if most of the students are low income, she really had to work a lot. Kudos to your child's teacher risking her job trying to teach more than just play, play plans and roles in a grocery store or restaurants.

I agree that TOTM can be poorly implemented (what program can't?), but I feel -- in my child's instance -- after 1.5 years with good teachers, he and his classmates, most of whom are low-income, will be on equally steady footing for K. Not only will they 'know' the basics - alphabet, simple math, sight words, but more importantly they've all been through the 'self-regulation' drills for two years, which really helps the kids with all aspects of behavior.

When I toured Cleveland (last year) they had only 1 classroom using TOTM and while the teacher might have been good, she couldn't articulate why she was doing what she was doing. I had the impression she had gotten 2 days of training and then no support / back-up and that the administration was at all committed to the program. I think TOTM works best when all classes do it, it has administration support, and teachers can share ideas and resources.

No, I was saying that the grandma volunteer, who works with the high fliers is likely NOT doing tools things. So it's better to have the 'teacher' busy with play plans and what not- and leave the more academic work to the non teacher. Also, will add that I would actually not mind sending my son to a tools classroom. But I would understand exactly what it is. Structured play. Which is actually ok for preschool, IMO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please ignore pretty much everything that has been said in the previous post. You are referencing information that you know nothing about, nor have studied, nor have actually implemented as a classroom teacher. Unfortunately, it sounds like the classroom within which you volunteer has a teacher that does not implement the Tools of the Mind program well.

In terms of grading play, that is completely against the philosophy of Tools. Most schools use the GOLD assessment system, which is a developmentally appropriate, research based assessment tool that provides the benchmarks for typically developing children across several developmental domains.

Realistically, the curriculum that is implemented in your child's classroom isn't nearly as important at the quality of the teacher. A teacher implements a curriculum, and they can do that well or poorly. I would ask potential principals if you're allowed to sit in on a class for more than 5 minutes as a pass-through, or see if any teachers are willing to speak with parents about what they do during the day. That will give you a better understanding of the pedagogical knowledge that the teacher has, and will hopefully demonstrate his or her ability to meet the needs of a diverse group of learners.

I think it's valid to complain about implementation. It sounds like the pK teacher is not well cut out to be teaching the curriculum or the age group. And I think it's a bit suspect that she is relying on a parent to do the work of an instructional assistant. Is she a new teacher?

I also think it's valid to acknowledge some teachers thrive in creativity/craftiness but others do not. And it sucks that DCPS and the school are not giving any kind of budget for buying/creating materials for the curriclum. I sometimes think DCPS has such a high salary in part because teachers pay for so much out of pocket.

Teacher let's parents work with the high fliers, because if her master educator comes in, and she in doing 'tools' then she will get dinged in her impact . Also- your theory about DCPs high salaries does not connect the dots. We pay a lot because we have to... Otherwise no one would teach here. Honestly. The number of teachers with less than five years experience is striking . We lure them in, keep them with inflated salaries, then they run. The reason DC does not provide the supports is not because they pay 'well', but rather because they are disorganized.

Wait why would a ME ding for following the mandated curriculum? Also I was being sarcastic about the salary. I find DCPS's lack of organization frustrating

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please ignore pretty much everything that has been said in the previous post. You are referencing information that you know nothing about, nor have studied, nor have actually implemented as a classroom teacher. Unfortunately, it sounds like the classroom within which you volunteer has a teacher that does not implement the Tools of the Mind program well.

In terms of grading play, that is completely against the philosophy of Tools. Most schools use the GOLD assessment system, which is a developmentally appropriate, research based assessment tool that provides the benchmarks for typically developing children across several developmental domains.

Realistically, the curriculum that is implemented in your child's classroom isn't nearly as important at the quality of the teacher. A teacher implements a curriculum, and they can do that well or poorly. I would ask potential principals if you're allowed to sit in on a class for more than 5 minutes as a pass-through, or see if any teachers are willing to speak with parents about what they do during the day. That will give you a better understanding of the pedagogical knowledge that the teacher has, and will hopefully demonstrate his or her ability to meet the needs of a diverse group of learners.

I think it's valid to complain about implementation. It sounds like the pK teacher is not well cut out to be teaching the curriculum or the age group. And I think it's a bit suspect that she is relying on a parent to do the work of an instructional assistant. Is she a new teacher?

I also think it's valid to acknowledge some teachers thrive in creativity/craftiness but others do not. And it sucks that DCPS and the school are not giving any kind of budget for buying/creating materials for the curriclum. I sometimes think DCPS has such a high salary in part because teachers pay for so much out of pocket.

Teacher let's parents work with the high fliers, because if her master educator comes in, and she in doing 'tools' then she will get dinged in her impact . Also- your theory about DCPs high salaries does not connect the dots. We pay a lot because we have to... Otherwise no one would teach here. Honestly. The number of teachers with less than five years experience is striking . We lure them in, keep them with inflated salaries, then they run. The reason DC does not provide the supports is not because they pay 'well', but rather because they are disorganized.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why dont you all just look at the independent research regarding tools of the mind? I provided the link up thread. It is does absolutely NOTHING. It sounds good but it does nothing. The idea of teaching kids to "play" is absolutely ridiculous. Grandma's assessment up thread only illustrates the research.

As I said upthread the point of the curriclum is not academic but teaching self regulation and self-control. The assessments focused on reading and math. It's like judging a fish about how well it climbs a tree.

Hear hear

Anonymous wrote:Why dont you all just look at the independent research regarding tools of the mind? I provided the link up thread. It is does absolutely NOTHING. It sounds good but it does nothing. The idea of teaching kids to "play" is absolutely ridiculous. Grandma's assessment up thread only illustrates the research.

As I said upthread the point of the curriclum is not academic but teaching self regulation and self-control. The assessments focused on reading and math. It's like judging a fish about how well it climbs a tree.

Anonymous wrote:Please ignore pretty much everything that has been said in the previous post. You are referencing information that you know nothing about, nor have studied, nor have actually implemented as a classroom teacher. Unfortunately, it sounds like the classroom within which you volunteer has a teacher that does not implement the Tools of the Mind program well.

In terms of grading play, that is completely against the philosophy of Tools. Most schools use the GOLD assessment system, which is a developmentally appropriate, research based assessment tool that provides the benchmarks for typically developing children across several developmental domains.

Realistically, the curriculum that is implemented in your child's classroom isn't nearly as important at the quality of the teacher. A teacher implements a curriculum, and they can do that well or poorly. I would ask potential principals if you're allowed to sit in on a class for more than 5 minutes as a pass-through, or see if any teachers are willing to speak with parents about what they do during the day. That will give you a better understanding of the pedagogical knowledge that the teacher has, and will hopefully demonstrate his or her ability to meet the needs of a diverse group of learners.

I think it's valid to complain about implementation. It sounds like the pK teacher is not well cut out to be teaching the curriculum or the age group. And I think it's a bit suspect that she is relying on a parent to do the work of an instructional assistant. Is she a new teacher?

I also think it's valid to acknowledge some teachers thrive in creativity/craftiness but others do not. And it sucks that DCPS and the school are not giving any kind of budget for buying/creating materials for the curriclum. I sometimes think DCPS has such a high salary in part because teachers pay for so much out of pocket.

It seems to be helping my preschooler with learning to prioritize, take turns and share, work together with her friends in class. She is excited about the different themes that rotate during the year (grocery store, animal hospital, doctor's etc.) I think it helps English language learners with picking up English words for various day-to-day things they encounter around town. Tools is mostly about self-regulation. If you can focus, take turns and know the words for things you are going to have an easier time with academics in K and first grade.
Writing sentences - my PK-4 kid really can't read yet, she is still working on writing her letters and can read a few easy words especially if you give her lots of hints. Her older sister could read at 3 so this is how new mommies learn that it's not necessarily the environment, every kid is different! But as for sentences, they draw a picture and then underneath they draw a series of underlines with spaces between them to represent the words in the sentence. Then (with varying success) they will fill in the words - sometimes just scribbles, mangled letters, one letter might represent a whole word, or (in my eldest's daughters case) entire words. I AM GOing To hELP the Pets. Or I m G to held t P. It helps develop a foundation for sentence structure.

I put a couple of Tools schools on my list. I have visited several classrooms and while they felt a little too structured for my taste, they didn't seem "bad" and in some cases seemed pretty dynamic. And the teachers said they learn to be flexible with it. (They also seemed unwilling to say anything bad about it, but they didn't seem particularly enthused.) But I do have to say that the structured play thing seems a little weird and I kind hope I get in somewhere else (these were safeties).

I heard kipp grow is switching to tools next year.

Anonymous wrote:Why dont you all just look at the independent research regarding tools of the mind? I provided the link up thread. It is does absolutely NOTHING. It sounds good but it does nothing. The idea of teaching kids to "play" is absolutely ridiculous. Grandma's assessment up thread only illustrates the research.

I agree that scientific proof is lacking, but that can also be said about 99% things going on in any given classroom. Tell me, from a typical school day, what meets the hardcore What Works Clearinghouse standards.

Anonymous wrote:Does KIPP use Tools?

Nope. They have essentially developed their own methodology to accomplish similar if not better results.

Anybody have kids who HATE it? My take is that it is something to structure the day around play.

Why dont you all just look at the independent research regarding tools of the mind? I provided the link up thread. It is does absolutely NOTHING. It sounds good but it does nothing. The idea of teaching kids to "play" is absolutely ridiculous. Grandma's assessment up thread only illustrates the research.