Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Provide it yourself and assume that MCPS is actively hostile to educational achievement.

Sure, more than happy to. We do this with everything else but a) not sure what’s out there/high quality for math (CTY, RSM, etc) and b) this plan is hasty and ill-conceived and was barely publicized. I’m at a loss for how to advocate for change when I’m not even sure what’s is coming down the line - especially for current second graders.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We were on the fence about CES last year, but I'm really glad we did it.

Well given their plan to change CES that won’t be a solution for families in the future.

No, and it's a real shame. CES has been what appropriately advanced instruction for kids who are ready for it should. My kid has come excited to talk about what they read and I've seen real growth from the program. It's the first time in MCPS that I've felt like she actually learned something in ELA. It'll be modernized to death pretty soon though, and who cares if kids suffer? They were probably privileged anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Provide it yourself and assume that MCPS is actively hostile to educational achievement.

+1

Russian Math, AOPS, and others provide acceleration. Don’t count in MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Provide it yourself and assume that MCPS is actively hostile to educational achievement.

+1

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Provide it yourself and assume that MCPS is actively hostile to educational achievement.

If state requires that kids in grades 2-5 be regrouped by level for math class, have or are they also suggesting group them by reading level as well? Isn't it comsidered a discrimination if there are 4 classes in a grade, all poor performing math or/reading kids are all grouped one class if they decide to go down that route?

Anonymous wrote:For folks who are unaware because they were not in a cohorted class this year, Model 1 was poorly designed and in many schools there was zero enrichment provided to the kids-- it was not required to provide enrichment to them, instead it was just required to move through the CKLA units more quickly but without skipping activities or content, which you can't really do well (it's not the same as math where there is a whole unit on one topic and once the kids get it they can move on-- a day of CKLA has a bunch of individual units and topics and skipping some of it is tricky or impossible.). So no wonder the scores for that were bad.

It’s because MCPS wanted it to fail so they could have only all-levels classes. For equity.

Anonymous wrote:We were on the fence about CES last year, but I'm really glad we did it.

Well given their plan to change CES that won’t be a solution for families in the future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Kids in 2nd grade get "enrichment" -- they've never been accelerated

Starting next year, the state requires that kids in grades 2-5 be regrouped by level for math class. It's not totally explicit that they have to have them in separate classrooms based on their level (although I think that's what they mean), but at minimum it seems like it at least has to be cluster grouping. But they are leaving 2nd grade out of the cluster grouping in the presentation.

"By SY 2026-2027, school schedules should be aligned to the MTSS expectations and the expectations below:
a. In early grades PreK-1, schools must maintain heterogenous mathematics classrooms. Flexible grouping should be utilized to support and enrich student learning.
b. In elementary grades 2-5, schools should purposefully and regularly regroup students for math instruction based on LEA developed MTSS math structures, including accelerated math classes."

https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/documents/dcaa/math/math-policy-version-adopted-march-25-a.pdf

Anonymous wrote:It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Kids in 2nd grade get "enrichment" -- they've never been accelerated

It seems like kids currently in second grade are totally neglected in this plan - slides 13-14 totally glosses over them. I don’t understand how to help my kid get what he needs

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, making current 4th graders repeat content is annoying, but parents may want to keep their eye on the ball here when it comes to math.

The REAL issue is that this model has kids doing Pre-Calculus in 9th grade, but then Calculus A/B and B/C in succession.

For a highly able kid, it makes zero sense to take both A/B and B/C, and pretending that it does make sense is likely covering up the fact that MCPS does not intend to provide those kids with a real math track beyond 10th grade.

I don’t think the standard “honors” math pathway should be BC in 10th, multivariate in 11th and what, linear algebra? differential equations? In 12th? Expecting MCPS to teach 3 years of college math is unreasonable. I was a good math student. I took Calc AB senior year. I never took any math beyond that and have never regretted it. Was I capable of it? Probably. But why force it on kids because there’s a 4 year HS math requirement? I think the AB then BC in sequence makes sense. If that’s “easy” for your kid, great! They get to spend more time on a subject that’s harder for them or another enriching outside activity.

It should be an available track and option.

Also, the state says they are supposed to be regrouping kids starting in 2nd grade starting next year (as well as implementing flexible grouping in grades K-1)-- but they are talking about only starting in 3rd and not even starting it for 3rd graders until 2027-28:

"7. By SY 2026-2027, school schedules should be aligned to the MTSS expectations and the expectations below:
a. In early grades PreK-1, schools must maintain heterogenous mathematics classrooms. Flexible grouping should be utilized to support and enrich student learning.
b. In elementary grades 2-5, schools should purposefully and regularly regroup students for math instruction based on LEA developed MTSS math structures, including accelerated math classes."

https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/documents/dcaa/math/math-policy-version-adopted-march-25-a.pdf (page 13)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new state guidance requires schools to do Individualized Acceleration Plans and hold IAP meetings (with a committee including a "school administrator, mathematics educator, counselor, family member, the student, and a gifted specialist when available") for all kids in accelerated math, which is a good idea in theory but probably will be very time-consuming. No wonder they want to decrease the numbers.

https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/documents/dcaa/math/sample-individualized-acceleration-plan-a.pdf
https://marylandpublicschools.org/about/documents/dcaa/math/math-acceleration-guidance-a.pdf

That said, if your kid scores a 4 on the MCAP they have to do one of these for them, so folks in that situation should insist on one, convene the team, and push for the acceleration you think your kid needs. The guidance is pretty clear that acceleration is appropriate for kids who've already mastered all grade-level standards. (Not sure if this requirement kicks in next year or the year after, though, but you can try for it for next year.)

Is there guidance for acceleration other than in math?

Not really. There's a brief reference in the upcoming grades 4-12 literacy policy ("Include differentiation and access to complex texts for diverse learners—including gifted and talented students (appropriate acceleration/extension), multilingual learners
(discipline-specific language supports), and students with disabilities (accessible materials and accommodations)" but that's about it as far as subject-specific stuff as far as I know.

There's also the general gifted and talented policies, but they provide a lot of flexibility to schools: https://marylandpublicschools.org/programs/documents/gifted-talented/criteria-for-excellence-gifted-and-talented-education-program-a.pdf https://marylandpublicschools.org/programs/documents/gifted-talented/maryland-model-of-gifted-and-talented-education-a.pdf

The state G&T policy does say things like:

--"Additionally, curriculum and instruction must be both culturally responsive and designed to meet the advanced academic needs of gifted and talented students."
-- "Curriculum and instruction for gifted and talented students must be cognitively rigorous, emphasizing the development and application of advanced critical thinking, creative problem-solving, and analytical and logical reasoning skills."
-- "A variety of research-based acceleration opportunities are available, including early entrance to school, subject acceleration, grade acceleration, curriculum compacting, access to above-grade level standards/materials and dual enrollment/dual credit in college."
-- "The achievement of gifted and talented students is evaluated and monitored to ensure growth and an appropriate level of challenge. Provisions, including adding services or supports, are made for identified gifted and talented students
not making adequate growth to provide additional student support."
-- "Local school systems should establish a Gifted and Talented Advisory Council that reflects the demographic and cultural diversity of the school system’s population. The council serves as a collaborative body to provide guidance, feedback, and recommendations to support the development, implementation, and continuous improvement of gifted and talented programs and services... The council must meet regularly, at least twice per academic year, to review program implementation, provide input on policy and practices, and support the ongoing enhancement of gifted education programs and services."

MCPS doesn't appear to be in compliance with any of this.

Slide 6 on today’s PPT is the most idiotic evidence I’ve ever seen.

They take the same cohort of students, and show their math proficiency declining each year.

They insinuate it is the fault of the students and their being pushed too far too soon. It couldn’t possibly be the crappy curriculum MCPS has been using with proven gaps, remediation that was never done to cover topics MCPS knowingly condensed and omitted so they didn’t have to teach on Wednesdays in the pandemic, trends in district policy to reduce homework, lack of standardized criteria across the district in placing students in appropriate math classes, providing compacted math only virtually in numerous schools and so on and so forth. This is an outcome of their own making and the solution shouldn’t be to deny appropriate math pathways to younger children.