Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people need to understand that even with a lot of supports, there will still be a wide range of outcomes no matter what the school system does. I teach in another district and even with multiple pull outs per day, some of my students are still below and far below grade level.

They are eventually tested and found to have low IQs (usually between 70-75) which means they take MUCH longer to learn. They don't have a learning disability. They are performing to their ability.

That’s the reality that most people don’t want to accept. There’s very little you can do to raise IQ as well.

This is it. And Generally it correlates with income level but perfectly ofc. But this is how the world works and this we need separate tracks and options for those kids.

Anonymous wrote:I think people need to understand that even with a lot of supports, there will still be a wide range of outcomes no matter what the school system does. I teach in another district and even with multiple pull outs per day, some of my students are still below and far below grade level.

They are eventually tested and found to have low IQs (usually between 70-75) which means they take MUCH longer to learn. They don't have a learning disability. They are performing to their ability.

That’s the reality that most people don’t want to accept. There’s very little you can do to raise IQ as well.

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

There a lot of research out there shows that universal pre-k doesn’t help any, and might be harmful. From npr: https://www.npr.org/2022/02/10/1079406041/researcher-says-rethink-prek-preschool-prekindergarten


“ And by "this," she means the outcome of a study that lasted more than a decade. It included 2,990 low-income children in Tennessee who applied to free, public prekindergarten programs. Some were admitted by lottery, and the others were rejected, creating the closest thing you can get in the real world to a randomized, controlled trial — the gold standard in showing causality in science.

Farran and her co-authors at Vanderbilt University followed both groups of children all the way through sixth grade. At the end of their first year, the kids who went to pre-K scored higher on school readiness — as expected.

But after third grade, they were doing worse than the control group. And at the end of sixth grade, they were doing even worse. They had lower test scores, were more likely to be in special education, and were more likely to get into trouble in school, including serious trouble like suspensions.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

Montgomery County already offers FREE pre-K for lower income families with bus service.

How has that been working out for the kids who attend the free MCPS preK program?

The current program is half day only, but outcomes are good. Kids coming out of Head Start are more likely to be identified for early intervention if they need it, and are more ready for kindergarten than kids who are demographically similar but did not attend.

They might be ready for Kindergarten, but what about further down the line?

Do the kids who attend Head Start perform better in MS than kids who have not attended Head Start? I remember reading that it is not the case.

We can’t spend money on things that aren’t actually making a difference. Universal PreK can wait.

Smaller class sizes and better discipline in schools need to be a priority.

Yes..studies show that over time the results of Head Start fade to almost nothing after a year or two.

Eh, the studies are a little bit in conflict. One of the consistent outcomes is an increase in attending and finishing college, even if some of the benefits seem to wash away in upper elementary.

Another interesting finding is that, of kids who were identified as having behavioral issues in Head Start, the ones whose challenges were teacher-identified did much better after Head Start than the ones whose issues were parent-identified. Essentially, it is less effective in cases where the parent is themselves struggling with parenting.

Now, we also know that any preschool is better than no preschool, even if there are tweaks to be made to the Head Start model.

I think people need to understand that even with a lot of supports, there will still be a wide range of outcomes no matter what the school system does. I teach in another district and even with multiple pull outs per day, some of my students are still below and far below grade level.

They are eventually tested and found to have low IQs (usually between 70-75) which means they take MUCH longer to learn. They don't have a learning disability. They are performing to their ability.

The main issue regarding testing and other metrics used to judge school is that students with limited English proficiency can’t do well on the exams in an any subject. If you don’t know English well how could you?

We need drastic improvements in ESOL support and cut out the honors for all with non existent “differentiation” model pushed by school. Differentiation is basically a myth in most curriculums and can realistically only adjust +/-1 grade level in terms of ability. Not having advanced math kids with kids who don’t know the multiplication tables and still do math on their fingers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

Montgomery County already offers FREE pre-K for lower income families with bus service.

How has that been working out for the kids who attend the free MCPS preK program?

It is available but it should be mandatory.

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

This and the expectation at the beginning of kindergarten is not zero. So these kids enter already behind and unless they are smart, have excellent attendance, and a supportive home environment, it’s nearly impossible to catch up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

Montgomery County already offers FREE pre-K for lower income families with bus service.

How has that been working out for the kids who attend the free MCPS preK program?

The current program is half day only, but outcomes are good. Kids coming out of Head Start are more likely to be identified for early intervention if they need it, and are more ready for kindergarten than kids who are demographically similar but did not attend.

They might be ready for Kindergarten, but what about further down the line?

Do the kids who attend Head Start perform better in MS than kids who have not attended Head Start? I remember reading that it is not the case.

We can’t spend money on things that aren’t actually making a difference. Universal PreK can wait.

Smaller class sizes and better discipline in schools need to be a priority.

Yes..studies show that over time the results of Head Start fade to almost nothing after a year or two.

Anonymous wrote:Agree to PP.

Asking a lower performing 2nd grade student to do 12-8=? in 5 different ways is ridiculous.

Exactly. Have them master one way before introducing anything else.

Switch out their parents for ones who give a s%*t.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Universal pre-k for both 3 and 4-year-olds. It’s the only thing. We have to get them in younger. We are getting kindergarteners who don’t know colors, don’t know their names, can’t use the bathroom, can barely talk in their native language. For whatever reason, parents are just not preparing them. We cannot make up that deficit starting at age 5.

Montgomery County already offers FREE pre-K for lower income families with bus service.

How has that been working out for the kids who attend the free MCPS preK program?

The current program is half day only, but outcomes are good. Kids coming out of Head Start are more likely to be identified for early intervention if they need it, and are more ready for kindergarten than kids who are demographically similar but did not attend.

They might be ready for Kindergarten, but what about further down the line?

Do the kids who attend Head Start perform better in MS than kids who have not attended Head Start? I remember reading that it is not the case.

We can’t spend money on things that aren’t actually making a difference. Universal PreK can wait.

Smaller class sizes and better discipline in schools need to be a priority.

Anonymous wrote:Smaller classes would help a lot.
I have 30 kids per class in highschool with an Honors for all setup and it is impossible to teach- half the class needs remediation, one-quarter are advanced and the remainder are at the right level. Impossible to give the kids individual attention. We are going way slower than we should be but I can’t have half the class failing

Agree that we need smaller class sizes. That needs to be a priority.

My kid’s MS and HS class sizes just keep getting larger. Not even enough seats for the kids in DS’ MS History class. Same for ES. Smaller class sizes help kids.

I would prefer to see smaller class sizes before worrying about something like universal preK.

Tutoring seems to come up frequently here. What has or does McPS plan to do to increase number of QUaliFIED tutors? Are they being hired, or are schools counting on volunteers? Can para s tutor?

Anonymous wrote:Smaller classes would help a lot.
I have 30 kids per class in highschool with an Honors for all setup and it is impossible to teach- half the class needs remediation, one-quarter are advanced and the remainder are at the right level. Impossible to give the kids individual attention. We are going way slower than we should be but I can’t have half the class failing

Is it an English class? I wonder if the district could prioritize smaller 9th and/or 10th grade English classes and/or return to offering non-honors English and make that class smaller.