Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like mcps is doing a disservice to most kids who are not enrolled in ELC. The achievement gap will only broaden if some kids get ELC and others are stuck with benchmark. I am an immigrant, back home the curriculum used was for everyone. There was no acceleration or differentiation. I know its the norm here. But what we had worked. The curriculum was really good and challenging and some kids did really well ant go A’s others got B’s, C’s , D’s and some failed too. Everyone had a chance to learn the same material and yes it was more difficult for some than others but it was not watered down for kids were less smart or anything. It seemed fair. What mcps is doing is unfair. I don’t have a 4th/5th grader in benchmark but the kids I know who are not in ELC are fully capable of doing ELC.

Differentiation has been going on for a very long time. Not at all students learn at the same rate, so no… they should not all have the same curriculum. Those failing students youre talking about? They were failed by that school system. There is a reason why CES/ELC exist.

Anonymous wrote:For those who are getting the results of the assessments--does the school share the questions and what your DC got right/wrong, or just a grade? I see a grade in parentvue, but I don't see any way to see the assignment. It's not in Canvas anywhere that I can tell.

Anonymous wrote:Seems like mcps is doing a disservice to most kids who are not enrolled in ELC. The achievement gap will only broaden if some kids get ELC and others are stuck with benchmark. I am an immigrant, back home the curriculum used was for everyone. There was no acceleration or differentiation. I know its the norm here. But what we had worked. The curriculum was really good and challenging and some kids did really well ant go A’s others got B’s, C’s , D’s and some failed too. Everyone had a chance to learn the same material and yes it was more difficult for some than others but it was not watered down for kids were less smart or anything. It seemed fair. What mcps is doing is unfair. I don’t have a 4th/5th grader in benchmark but the kids I know who are not in ELC are fully capable of doing ELC.

Anonymous wrote:Seems like mcps is doing a disservice to most kids who are not enrolled in ELC. The achievement gap will only broaden if some kids get ELC and others are stuck with benchmark. I am an immigrant, back home the curriculum used was for everyone. There was no acceleration or differentiation. I know its the norm here. But what we had worked. The curriculum was really good and challenging and some kids did really well ant go A’s others got B’s, C’s , D’s and some failed too. Everyone had a chance to learn the same material and yes it was more difficult for some than others but it was not watered down for kids were less smart or anything. It seemed fair. What mcps is doing is unfair. I don’t have a 4th/5th grader in benchmark but the kids I know who are not in ELC are fully capable of doing ELC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

They’re saying that it’s not appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading.

It's absolutely appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading. Actually super surprised to hear some schools aren't. In my last Benchmark training, we were in multiple break out rooms, different people every time...we all asked each other what we used for grading and pretty much everyone stated the assessments first thing. The assessments are difficult but they are assessing the students on what they learned that week/unit...I'd say the majority of students at our school get Bs.

They make the CES students take them, too, and they don’t even learn those units or have any exposure to that curriculum. I don’t know why and I didn’t think using those grades was exactly fair.

Not accurate. CES students take the required interims only and they have been taught the material, just in different ways. Most students in CES are capable of synthesizing the information they have learned in CES and what Benchmark students are learning well and score high. Assessments are only fair if they are a valid representation of what is taught. CES students are taught these skills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

They’re saying that it’s not appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading.

It's absolutely appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading. Actually super surprised to hear some schools aren't. In my last Benchmark training, we were in multiple break out rooms, different people every time...we all asked each other what we used for grading and pretty much everyone stated the assessments first thing. The assessments are difficult but they are assessing the students on what they learned that week/unit...I'd say the majority of students at our school get Bs.

They make the CES students take them, too, and they don’t even learn those units or have any exposure to that curriculum. I don’t know why and I didn’t think using those grades was exactly fair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

They’re saying that it’s not appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading.

It's absolutely appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading. Actually super surprised to hear some schools aren't. In my last Benchmark training, we were in multiple break out rooms, different people every time...we all asked each other what we used for grading and pretty much everyone stated the assessments first thing. The assessments are difficult but they are assessing the students on what they learned that week/unit...I'd say the majority of students at our school get Bs.

They make the CES students take them, too, and they don’t even learn those units or have any exposure to that curriculum. I don’t know why and I didn’t think using those grades was exactly fair.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

They’re saying that it’s not appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading.

It's absolutely appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading. Actually super surprised to hear some schools aren't. In my last Benchmark training, we were in multiple break out rooms, different people every time...we all asked each other what we used for grading and pretty much everyone stated the assessments first thing. The assessments are difficult but they are assessing the students on what they learned that week/unit...I'd say the majority of students at our school get Bs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

They’re saying that it’s not appropriate to use Benchmark assessments for grading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

I'm a SDT in the county and our school has teams give the weekly and unit assessments as they choose. Very few give grades for them though. If the primary teams do give the assessments for a grade, they need to be mindful that the foundational skills grades from the assessments should not be used for a grade as those skills are taught in a different sequence through Really Great Reading.

I am not sure what that means

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

Have to give you a 10 for victim shaming.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally wouldn't be too concerned about the occasional C on Benchmark, when MAP-R is the more accurate measure. Like a PP said, Benchmark's questionable assessments are why many top MAP performers weren't given that GT designation.

My DC was one of those who didn’t get the GT designation due to benchmark assessment. He is to be rescreened. But might still not get the GT designation again due to random C’s on benchmark assessment again this year. Plus its not great for self esteem either.

This stinks and I’m really sorry. A similar thing happened to my child in mcps. Maddening.

You really need an excuse to why your kid isn’t doing well. Everyone here will cater but here’s a hint: it’s not Benchmark. The curriculum isn’t great that part isn’t a lie, but the high kids…. score well and pretty consistently. Yes, the tests are difficult. Your kid probably doesn’t deserve the GT designation if they can’t handle the Benchmark tests.

Thank you for the bluntness! I am aware its not benchmark. I am concerned about my DC’s inconsistent performance and I know its not ADHD or anything like that. Without turning him into an anxious kid who is worried about grades and getting C’s, how do I help?