Anonymous wrote:Someone should be held accountable for the costly mistake with Benchmark.
The working group of educators who reviewed the various options did not support Benchmark. So who made the decision to go against the recommendation?
Big, expensive mistake that negatively impacted students.
Where’s the accountability?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Not a teacher, but that’s just basic breaking words into syllables. We say prof-it, no pro-fit. If it were ra-dish, we would pronounce it ray-dish. It needs to be rad-ish to be a short a.
Yes, I get what you mean and thanks for your input. For me, the root word meaning is more important as kids are going to learn a second language. Great chances are the second language is originated from Latin (Italian, Spanish, French, etc.), where "pro" means "projecting", and "plast" stands for "molder". Then it's natural to understand "profit" as "projecting to make money", and "plastic" as something made by molders. What the heck is "plas" and then "tic"?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Not a teacher, but that’s just basic breaking words into syllables. We say prof-it, no pro-fit. If it were ra-dish, we would pronounce it ray-dish. It needs to be rad-ish to be a short a.
I agree. Not to mention, spelling uses phonics rules,not just breaking a word into syllables.
Yes, I get what you mean and thanks for your input. For me, the root word meaning is more important as kids are going to learn a second language. Great chances are the second language is originated from Latin (Italian, Spanish, French, etc.), where "pro" means "projecting", and "plast" stands for "molder". Then it's natural to understand "profit" as "projecting to make money", and "plastic" as something made by molders. What the heck is "plas" and then "tic"?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Not a teacher, but that’s just basic breaking words into syllables. We say prof-it, no pro-fit. If it were ra-dish, we would pronounce it ray-dish. It needs to be rad-ish to be a short a.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Your 1st grader has spelling tests? I don’t think mine has had any. Or at least he’s never brought them home.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
I'm about to initiate a new post to complain about RGR as I have an elder kid who went through the terrible curriculum 2.0, and a younger one who just started the benchmark, which was better than C2.0, but then started to be taught and tested on the RGR.
For the spelling test (1st grade), this is graded wrong: PRO-FIT. The correct answer is PROF-IT.
PLAST-IC is wrong. PLAS-TIC is correct.
RA-DISH is wrong. RAD-ISH is correct.
I receive such non-sense examples pretty much every week. I couldn't be convinced this curriculum is better at teaching kids spelling. It's breaking the root word rules. Since you are a teacher and like the RGR, could you explain? Thanks.
Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.
Anonymous wrote:When would they implement a new curriculum? Benchmark is awful!
Anonymous wrote:Wtf you love about RGR and phonics, every two thing you teach the kids you have to tell them but here is an exception. I think phonics is a terrible system to each spelling and kids just know how to sound it out without knowing the meaning.
Anonymous wrote:I'll chime in as another MCPS elementary teacher. I hope we get rid of Benchmark and keep Really Great Reading for K-2 for phonics. We'll still need something to replace Benchmark.