Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

I found the MCPS math curriculum pre C2.0 too superficial and fragmented so I spent time during grades 3_5 working with ds on Singapore Math during summer vacation. It cost around $100 for textbook, workbook and teacher’s instruction manual. The latter is essential. You don’t want to just throw workbooks at your child. You should actually teach them and the teacher manual is really excellent. The textbook and workbook are simple without too much distracting content but the manual is highly detailed and really teaches you how to teach your children There are different editions and I tried to get the one that was closest to the original Singapore based curriculum

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

This is just making me sad that our kids won’t have anything good for another two years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

I thought this wapo article bent over backwards to portray them as having done little wrong. It also repeats the fiction that Discovery “discovered” they were involved in the bidding process when clearly discovery having bid on the project would know that the head of the curriculum office was involved In the process. I also thought it minimizes how pissed parents are about the delays. This thread is a gazillion posts long now.

I’ve seen both’s materials and they are very good. Night and day better, more sequential, more thorough, more logical and easy to follow than c2.0 or some online elemtary school BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Potomac school
Primary day school
Norwood selecting now
Beauvoir does bits/pieces
Gds uses Go Math

If you can teach math well the above are very good and the kids love math.

so then who is responsible for c2.0 if some anonymous WaPo person claims everyone at central office is a victim of central office?

The end all be all problem is the oNE YEAR DELAY of pilotig a new and approved math and English K-8 curriculum. Plus the ONE- THREE year delay of some schools even receiving a decent curriculum.

That’s the problem.

MCPS should be working over he summer to solve this.

And btw, if they pick some goofy, semi-experimental, Chromebook/online-ladened “curriculum” with no textbooks or workbooks families like us will absolutely leave MOCo and MCPS in droves. My youngest kid is incoming K and I’ve listened to Co-workers and neighbors disgusted with MCPS curriculum and lack of ability tracking for able-students.

This will be the absolutely last chance. I don’t care how many friends my three kids have at MCPS we will be movhave Ng to VA or going private like we almost did three years ago for our oldest.

No one at central - lang, fiaozo. Other lacy 50 ppl in the committee or Smith- out the kids first by issuing a total delay until September knowing it washed out a whole entire year of students chance at an actual curriculum that leading public and private school districts use.

Again, if they botch this, we’re out. And we know our options, can afford them and know what they do for math and ela.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

I found Mr Lang surprisingly accessible and willing to meet with and listen to students and parents.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

I have to say when you read this something isn’t right about blaming Lang and fliekas primarily. Looks like smith is throwing them under the bus. One of the comments after the article, which mirrors the reporting:


8 hours ago
“I'm glad the Post pointed out that Jim and Erick did everything right in this process, rather than making them the villains MCPS has tried to make them. Jim and Erick are two of the most principled educators I've ever worked with, and for years now they've worked to do what's best for kids and to add diversity to the curriculum in a work environment where leaders often engage in assigning blame rather than looking for solutions. As a teacher who ended my career in Central Services, I had an up-close seat to observe the politics without having to be involved in them. I can't count the times that I watched staff in the curriculum office try to work within the system to do what was best for kids and to provide resources for teachers in an atmosphere where that clearly wasn't the top priority among administrators who often seemed more concerned about the MCPS brand.”

Anonymous wrote:Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

FWIW, few local privates use Singapore Math. The only one I can think of is Sheridan School.

I'd also note that most fans of Singapore Math tend to be somewhat negative on how it's done with Math In Focus. You'll see a lot of people using the original Singapore Math books instead of Math in Focus. This isn't to say that Math in Focus isn't better than MCPS 2.0, but it's not perfect.

Anonymous wrote:For those more in the know, what are some good examples of tested, established curricula that would be good candidates for MCPS?

Singapore Math is excellent especially for elementary school and it has a proven track record. It is straightforward , logical, thorough and gimmick free. Exactly what you want in a Math curriculum

Math in action (which is Singapore math) and Go Math are top. All the privates use it in states across the nation.
I’ve seen my nephews workbooks in Florida, it is awesome. So are having bound workbooks, btw!

Anonymous wrote:For those more in the know, what are some good examples of tested, established curricula that would be good candidates for MCPS?

I’m not in the know, but my relatives in NY have mentioned some of the better public schools there have started using Singapore Math. Someone upthread mentioned McGraw Hill for ELA.

For those more in the know, what are some good examples of tested, established curricula that would be good candidates for MCPS?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/potential-conflict-of-interest-derails-curriculum-rollout-in-md-school-system/2018/05/25/d28c96c2-5e9f-11e8-9ee3-49d6d4814c4c_story.html?utm_term=.1e96b4f5ab8c

WP’s article on the Discovery issue

Anonymous wrote:You mean shouldn’t the rfp process continue as achedul s back in March.
That’s the priority and that’s what hurts.
The two idiots interviewing and not reclusion’s themselves earlier f’d up everything for the whole huge district. And the other kicker is they are the ones who built the terrible ES curriculum that needs ASAP replacing! Now they’ve delayed the replacement process, apparently for the whole year since this is public school slow Gov’t.

But this is my question - What if they came clean early on? How “early” is early enough?

What if they hooked up with Discovery after the audit was done? Is that still unethical!