Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry, Common Core will tank MoCo property values across the board so all that will be left are people who can't move. Then your utopia of everyone having the same and equal skills, discipline, work ethic and smarts will be realized.

You are aware that the Common Core is a NATIONAL program, aren't you? Well done Einstein!

Hey Sherlock:
Implemented differently by each state or county, up to the locality and their needs to get act test scores up.

And guess what, huge MoCo has decided their needs aren't the GT kids, or the average kids, or the kids with actual families, it's the thousands of kids from low-skilled immigrants who don't speak English and live off benefits and cash jobs. Those get the extra teachers, the extra help, the teacher training, the lions share of the budget, the free breakfasts/lunches/weekend meal bags, etc. Those kids are what MoCo has deemed "low hanging fruit" to focus in to bring up test scores and school performance numbers. Everyone else can just coast along for the experiment, sorry if you're bored or not challenged.

I don't know what planet, country , state, or county in which you reside, but where-so-eva it is... I beg you, STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE!!!!

This sad person keeps writing about crack pipes instead of actually making any rational agrument supporting the other side. The system is spending the majority of the resources on the poor performers and is no longer stimulating the rest the way it has CHOSEN to implement the CC. There is no longer a way for a student to earn and "A". These kids don't even know what the grades mean but "a P is good". YOU are the one that needs to step away and leave the discussion if you have nothing meaningful to say except name calling. Reminds me of the administration not having any discussion with parents.

Totally agree. The crack pipe commenter is the real crack pipe. The truth is the majority of parents hate 2.0. And I have children two grades apart. Yes I can explain an A vs a B to my older son and no I cannot explain the P vs. ES to my other son

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/curriculum/math/math-curriculum-plan.aspx

MCPS says that the following math classes are under 2.0 in 2013-2014:

Kindergarten, Math 1, Math 2, Math 3, Math 4, Math 5, Algebra 1.

Math 6 and Geometry in 2014-2015, Math 7/IM and Algebra 2 in 2015-2016, Math 8 and Pre-calculus in 2016-2017.

Since Algebra 1 in 8th grade is on-grade-level math under 2.0, Algebra 1 should be (as the PP says) mostly a middle-school class.

Are they deviating from this schedule?

I guess Winston Churchill is along with the middle schools that feed there - according to the info. we received at Back to School Night. Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2 all fall into 2.0 this year at these schools. Perhaps our children are a subtest group.

Well there you go - Churchill is so advanced you are getting 2.0 two years before other high schools. We don't have it at Whitman (except maybe in Algebra 1, but how many Whitman or Churchill kids are taking Algebra 1?) Enjoy!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry, Common Core will tank MoCo property values across the board so all that will be left are people who can't move. Then your utopia of everyone having the same and equal skills, discipline, work ethic and smarts will be realized.

You are aware that the Common Core is a NATIONAL program, aren't you? Well done Einstein!

Hey Sherlock:
Implemented differently by each state or county, up to the locality and their needs to get act test scores up.

And guess what, huge MoCo has decided their needs aren't the GT kids, or the average kids, or the kids with actual families, it's the thousands of kids from low-skilled immigrants who don't speak English and live off benefits and cash jobs. Those get the extra teachers, the extra help, the teacher training, the lions share of the budget, the free breakfasts/lunches/weekend meal bags, etc. Those kids are what MoCo has deemed "low hanging fruit" to focus in to bring up test scores and school performance numbers. Everyone else can just coast along for the experiment, sorry if you're bored or not challenged.

I don't know what planet, country , state, or county in which you reside, but where-so-eva it is... I beg you, STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE!!!!

This sad person keeps writing about crack pipes instead of actually making any rational agrument supporting the other side. The system is spending the majority of the resources on the poor performers and is no longer stimulating the rest the way it has CHOSEN to implement the CC. There is no longer a way for a student to earn and "A". These kids don't even know what the grades mean but "a P is good". YOU are the one that needs to step away and leave the discussion if you have nothing meaningful to say except name calling. Reminds me of the administration not having any discussion with parents.

Anonymous wrote:I have a GT/LD child and an NT child in curriculum 2.0. It is terrible IMO. My LD kid had straight Ps last year and a few very random ES grades. It was incredibly difficult to get out of the school that there are high Ps and low Ps. Its very unclear to my kid with LD what is expected and what is OK. Its next to impossible with this system to use the data or information from the school to manage meds or identify techniques that can help with the LD issues.

Parents with special needs kids should organize a class action law suit that MCPS is systemically violating federal ADA laws.

My NT kid is not gifted but bright. He was bored to death because the material is so easy. I have yet to hear or have even ONE conversation with a parent that likes the new grading system. I do believe that MCPS posts on this board.

This system doesn't serve the bright/average students, special needs, or gifted students. So far it seems to only serve MCPS.

I am sorry that your child's needs are not being met. Perhaps it is the school and the teachers and admin with whom you are dealing.
Sounds like you could have the same problems without 2.0. I like 2.0. I don't work for MOCO either.
For 2nd and 3rd grades my DC has had teachers who were very accessible and responsive to questions about the work being given and my child's progress. I most certainly do see that the rollout of 2.0 has been rocky. Change can be messy, but I don't think anyone's kid is going to doomed to dumbness because of it. I don't have major issues with the new grading system. No one can tell me that "O"'s , "E"'s or "A"'s and "B"'s were more informative than "P"'s and "I"'s. Each week my DC is coming home with a spreadsheet that denotes weekly progress in a number of learning areas. My kid is being assigned interesting long term projects that she is excited about. We supplement in various ways (library, workbooks, etc.) because we do not expect any school to be able to provide 100% of everything ANY kid would need.
Like I said, I am sorry that your child is not getting what he/she needs, but do not assume that everyone else is having the same experience.

Anonymous wrote:I have a GT/LD child and an NT child in curriculum 2.0. It is terrible IMO. My LD kid had straight Ps last year and a few very random ES grades. It was incredibly difficult to get out of the school that there are high Ps and low Ps. Its very unclear to my kid with LD what is expected and what is OK. Its next to impossible with this system to use the data or information from the school to manage meds or identify techniques that can help with the LD issues.

Parents with special needs kids should organize a class action law suit that MCPS is systemically violating federal ADA laws.

My NT kid is not gifted but bright. He was bored to death because the material is so easy. I have yet to hear or have even ONE conversation with a parent that likes the new grading system. I do believe that MCPS posts on this board.

This system doesn't serve the bright/average students, special needs, or gifted students. So far it seems to only serve MCPS.

+100 - How many parents have been at a 504/IEP meeting and heard the phrase "Your child is passing state standards. What more are we required to do?". However, does the team have proper data? Are secured documents available for review? Glossing over grades and passing kids through the system is even easier than before.

Anonymous wrote:My NT kid is not gifted but bright. He was bored to death because the material is so easy. I have yet to hear or have even ONE conversation with a parent that likes the new grading system. I do believe that MCPS posts on this board.

Maybe you should talk to a wider range of parents.

I have a GT/LD child and an NT child in curriculum 2.0. It is terrible IMO. My LD kid had straight Ps last year and a few very random ES grades. It was incredibly difficult to get out of the school that there are high Ps and low Ps. Its very unclear to my kid with LD what is expected and what is OK. Its next to impossible with this system to use the data or information from the school to manage meds or identify techniques that can help with the LD issues.

Parents with special needs kids should organize a class action law suit that MCPS is systemically violating federal ADA laws.

My NT kid is not gifted but bright. He was bored to death because the material is so easy. I have yet to hear or have even ONE conversation with a parent that likes the new grading system. I do believe that MCPS posts on this board.

This system doesn't serve the bright/average students, special needs, or gifted students. So far it seems to only serve MCPS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is down sliding and it isn't the changing demographics. MCPS is under awful leadership.

Curriculum 2.0 is a disaster and Starr is too arrogant to correct course. The majority of parent concerns could be addressed by throwing out the ridiculous new grading system and reinstating accelerated math programs for any child that achieves proficiency in math..not offering a pretend compacted class or and HGC center for only 3% when over 30% qualify.

For grading all the parents want is a report are and grading system that includes teacher comments, provides more granular measures, is fair and consistent (not arbitrary), and recognizes/incentivizes achievement. Its fine of schools want to measure themselves on whether 80% of the kids are P but that isn't the measurement that should be used for individuals....unless you don't give a damn about whether they are committed to getting a good education.

You do not speak for all parents. There are parents who disagree with you. Me, for example.

I don't think that MCPS is "down sliding". I don't like Starr much, but I don't think he's awful. I think Curriculum 2.0 is great, even if implementation has been a bit rocky. I think that Starr can't "change course" on Curriculum 2.0 anyway, no matter how much some parents scream and carry on, because Maryland is now a Common Core state, and Curriculum 2.0 is MCPS's Common Core curriculum. I have no problem with the new grading system for elementary schools. I am glad to see an end to over-acceleration in math. I see no evidence that Math 4/5 is a "pretend" compacted class. I don't think that the P/S/N grading system is any less fair and consistent or any more arbitrary than the previous O/S/I/letter grade system. I don't think grades are a beneficial motivator for elementary school kids anyway. . I don't know where the 80% P figure that DCUM flings around comes from. And all of this notwithstanding, my kids are also committed to getting a good education.

My sentiments exactly

Anonymous wrote:MCPS is down sliding and it isn't the changing demographics. MCPS is under awful leadership.

Curriculum 2.0 is a disaster and Starr is too arrogant to correct course. The majority of parent concerns could be addressed by throwing out the ridiculous new grading system and reinstating accelerated math programs for any child that achieves proficiency in math..not offering a pretend compacted class or and HGC center for only 3% when over 30% qualify.

For grading all the parents want is a report are and grading system that includes teacher comments, provides more granular measures, is fair and consistent (not arbitrary), and recognizes/incentivizes achievement. Its fine of schools want to measure themselves on whether 80% of the kids are P but that isn't the measurement that should be used for individuals....unless you don't give a damn about whether they are committed to getting a good education.

You do not speak for all parents. There are parents who disagree with you. Me, for example.

I don't think that MCPS is "down sliding". I don't like Starr much, but I don't think he's awful. I think Curriculum 2.0 is great, even if implementation has been a bit rocky. I think that Starr can't "change course" on Curriculum 2.0 anyway, no matter how much some parents scream and carry on, because Maryland is now a Common Core state, and Curriculum 2.0 is MCPS's Common Core curriculum. I have no problem with the new grading system for elementary schools. I am glad to see an end to over-acceleration in math. I see no evidence that Math 4/5 is a "pretend" compacted class. I don't think that the P/S/N grading system is any less fair and consistent or any more arbitrary than the previous O/S/I/letter grade system. I don't think grades are a beneficial motivator for elementary school kids anyway. . I don't know where the 80% P figure that DCUM flings around comes from. And all of this notwithstanding, my kids are also committed to getting a good education.

MCPS is down sliding and it isn't the changing demographics. MCPS is under awful leadership.

Curriculum 2.0 is a disaster and Starr is too arrogant to correct course. The majority of parent concerns could be addressed by throwing out the ridiculous new grading system and reinstating accelerated math programs for any child that achieves proficiency in math..not offering a pretend compacted class or and HGC center for only 3% when over 30% qualify.

For grading all the parents want is a report are and grading system that includes teacher comments, provides more granular measures, is fair and consistent (not arbitrary), and recognizes/incentivizes achievement. Its fine of schools want to measure themselves on whether 80% of the kids are P but that isn't the measurement that should be used for individuals....unless you don't give a damn about whether they are committed to getting a good education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry, Common Core will tank MoCo property values across the board so all that will be left are people who can't move. Then your utopia of everyone having the same and equal skills, discipline, work ethic and smarts will be realized.

You are aware that the Common Core is a NATIONAL program, aren't you? Well done Einstein!

Hey Sherlock:
Implemented differently by each state or county, up to the locality and their needs to get act test scores up.

And guess what, huge MoCo has decided their needs aren't the GT kids, or the average kids, or the kids with actual families, it's the thousands of kids from low-skilled immigrants who don't speak English and live off benefits and cash jobs. Those get the extra teachers, the extra help, the teacher training, the lions share of the budget, the free breakfasts/lunches/weekend meal bags, etc. Those kids are what MoCo has deemed "low hanging fruit" to focus in to bring up test scores and school performance numbers. Everyone else can just coast along for the experiment, sorry if you're bored or not challenged.

I don't know what planet, country , state, or county in which you reside, but where-so-eva it is... I beg you, STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE!!!!

Anonymous wrote:Many families have moved to Arlington

Yes, that is true. Many families have moved to Arlington.

Oh, wait, you're saying that many families have moved to Arlington to avoid MCPS? How many is "many", exactly, and how do you know?

Last spring DCUM was virtually unanimous that 2.0 would cause families to leave MCPS in droves. Enrollment is up this year.

http://www.bethesdanow.com/2013/08/27/mcps-sees-record-enrollment-for-2013-2014/

Many families have moved to Arlington

Anonymous wrote:
And guess what, huge MoCo has decided their needs aren't the GT kids, or the average kids, or the kids with actual families, it's the thousands of kids from low-skilled immigrants who don't speak English and live off benefits and cash jobs. Those get the extra teachers, the extra help, the teacher training, the lions share of the budget, the free breakfasts/lunches/weekend meal bags, etc. Those kids are what MoCo has deemed "low hanging fruit" to focus in to bring up test scores and school performance numbers. Everyone else can just coast along for the experiment, sorry if you're bored or not challenged.

I think that you are living in a different Montgomery County from the one I'm living in.

edit

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't worry, Common Core will tank MoCo property values across the board so all that will be left are people who can't move. Then your utopia of everyone having the same and equal skills, discipline, work ethic and smarts will be realized.

You are aware that the Common Core is a NATIONAL program, aren't you? Well done Einstein!

Common Core is a group of standards K-12. It's not a program.

Systems create curriculum FRAMEWORKS around the standards. Standards are grouped by unit, and units can change from system to system, depending upon how experts (however you define an expert) view the standards.

Teachers create lessons based on the frameworks.

The standards are quite rigorous - much harder than the CLGs that drove testing in the past. So if the gap grows, it's due to the fact that 1) teachers are NOT prepared to handle the CC standards and 2) they aren't given the time to figure them out.

They are to be used holistically, which means that literacy is a schoolwide effort - an area that's not handled solely by ELA teachers. [b]Furthermore, non-print media are infused throughout all lessons. And . . . .cross-curricular planning is encouraged.

so much to learn, PPs . . .

I wish I could train you, but I don't have the time!