Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS hates leaders. They're the kids who disrupt class, make their classmates laugh, talk back. Instead of harnessing "the leader" in them, they crush them. Who are they kidding.

It's true. Those kids are the ones all the other kids follow. They laugh at their jokes, sit where they sit, wear what they wear. They have real leadership abilities. Instead of being recognized as leaders, they're a threat to the teacher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS hates leaders. They're the kids who disrupt class, make their classmates laugh, talk back. Instead of harnessing "the leader" in them, they crush them. Who are they kidding.

Anonymous wrote:MCPS hates leaders. They're the kids who disrupt class, make their classmates laugh, talk back. Instead of harnessing "the leader" in them, they crush them. Who are they kidding.

Anonymous wrote:I’m in cohort 2 training now. A staff developer in a breakout room told us that Leader in Me is not being renewed and next year is the last year. Can anyone confirm this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the wrong intervention for kids who have experienced trauma. They should be doing a program that serves kids who need resiliency skills (leader in me isn't it). School counselors were not consulted and are unhappy with the directive.

Agreed, leader in me is very much the 90's self esteem crap. It's not what students need

Every teacher I know was not happy when it was announced. I think the union put something together opposing it? I'm very much in favor of social emotional learning in schools--the kids really do need it--but this is NOT the program.

What makes you say that? How is this program lacking, and Is there something out there that would be better?

Go back and read the original post which talks about how curriculum does not address children who have experienced trauma

So what program would address that appropriately and how do we advocate for it? I'm all for supporting kids who have experienced trauma.

The Resilience Builder Curriculum by Dr. Mary Alford. She’s a local psychologist with a national reputation. It’s a tested and proven curriculum.

"tested and proven" by whom?

Many studies in several peer-reviewed journals. Here is one such study: https://psychology.catholic.edu/_media/rich-lab/rich_ijgp_18.pdf
Some of the research was done in MCPS schools. They should know it works and do more of it. NPR covered it as well, focusing in on MCPS schools among others. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/05/23/613465023/for-troubled-kids-some-schools-take-time-out-for-group-therapy

I read the first link. This was not in MCPS. It only applied to elementary schools in DC. in a group of 60+ students who opted in. In the clinical study: "Results indicate that, as hypothesized, compared to children in the
delayed treatment comparison sample, children who received the
RBP intervention reported significant gains in emotion regulation
and significant reductions in negative emotions. In fact, children in
the delayed treatment comparison sample reported significant
decreases in emotion regulation and significant increases in negative
emotions. Thus, results indicate that the RBP improves functioning in
these domains and may mitigate the risk for continued worsening of
emotional functioning. No change was noted regarding positive
emotions."

Doesn't sound like Leader in Me and doesn't sound that effective.

Anonymous wrote:So, far the training has been un impressive.

Just constant buzzwords and jargon that are different from our usual typical phrasing in education.

This will bomb with my high schoolers.

We need trauma informed instruction. Not this.

The community requested specialized staff to work with students. This is not it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the wrong intervention for kids who have experienced trauma. They should be doing a program that serves kids who need resiliency skills (leader in me isn't it). School counselors were not consulted and are unhappy with the directive.

Agreed, leader in me is very much the 90's self esteem crap. It's not what students need

Every teacher I know was not happy when it was announced. I think the union put something together opposing it? I'm very much in favor of social emotional learning in schools--the kids really do need it--but this is NOT the program.

What makes you say that? How is this program lacking, and Is there something out there that would be better?

Go back and read the original post which talks about how curriculum does not address children who have experienced trauma

So what program would address that appropriately and how do we advocate for it? I'm all for supporting kids who have experienced trauma.

The Resilience Builder Curriculum by Dr. Mary Alford. She’s a local psychologist with a national reputation. It’s a tested and proven curriculum.

"tested and proven" by whom?

Many studies in several peer-reviewed journals. Here is one such study: https://psychology.catholic.edu/_media/rich-lab/rich_ijgp_18.pdf
Some of the research was done in MCPS schools. They should know it works and do more of it. NPR covered it as well, focusing in on MCPS schools among others. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/05/23/613465023/for-troubled-kids-some-schools-take-time-out-for-group-therapy