Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS sets teachers up to fail.

The class sizes are too large to provide adequate instruction. Parents aren't wrong for wanting their kids to do the best that they can BUT the system is not set up to empower teachers to achieve this with their students. The teacher's union, IMO, fails both teachers and students. I fully support increased teacher pay but the teacher's union would be far more successful with more voters if they also advocated for stronger curriculum, better class ratios, and resources for the students. There is too much bargaining that results in paltry pay increases and results in acceptance of crappy systems like MCPS' 2.0.

What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

This is the root of the problem. Everybody says they want better roads/recycling/schools/every other service, but nobody is willing to pay higher taxes.

Here's a corollary: if there's some way we could raise taxes and dedicated them only to gifted kids, not to those SN kids, I'm sure posters like 16:26 would be all over it. But democracies don't work that way.

Actually, i am 16:26, and i hear that i am not allowed to have an opinion, because of my kid's iq. Arbitrary, but whatever. You all are so far beyond rational it's pointless. But as a factual matter you are TOTALLY wrong about me in your assumption. I would be delighted to pay higher taxes for better SN services. I never said my kid got the rawest end of this deal. I fully get that the SN kids have it worse. I used to work with them.

And one more thing. This is a pathetic attempt to pit parents of gifted kids against parents of SN kids. As if by saying that there is no teaching going on for my kid i'm advocating for fewer services for SN kids. Such crap. The same teacher who decides she won't offer enrichment to a gifted kid is likely the same teacher who says the SN kid is"fine" because he's not below grade level. And OP's protestations that she doesn't mind parents who ask for appropriate services sound like vague nonsense. "Appropriate" in her all-knowing view, right? She could never be wrong and the parent is right. Of course not.

Anonymous wrote:


Actually, i am 16:26, and i hear that i am not allowed to have an opinion, because of my kid's iq. Arbitrary, but whatever. You all are so far beyond rational it's pointless. But as a factual matter you are TOTALLY wrong about me in your assumption. I would be delighted to pay higher taxes for better SN services. I never said my kid got the rawest end of this deal. I fully get that the SN kids have it worse. I used to work with them.

Well, no, actually, I specifically asked for your opinion. What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS sets teachers up to fail.

The class sizes are too large to provide adequate instruction. Parents aren't wrong for wanting their kids to do the best that they can BUT the system is not set up to empower teachers to achieve this with their students. The teacher's union, IMO, fails both teachers and students. I fully support increased teacher pay but the teacher's union would be far more successful with more voters if they also advocated for stronger curriculum, better class ratios, and resources for the students. There is too much bargaining that results in paltry pay increases and results in acceptance of crappy systems like MCPS' 2.0.

What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

This is the root of the problem. Everybody says they want better roads/recycling/schools/every other service, but nobody is willing to pay higher taxes.

Here's a corollary: if there's some way we could raise taxes and dedicated them only to gifted kids, not to those SN kids, I'm sure posters like 16:26 would be all over it. But democracies don't work that way.

Actually, i am 16:26, and i hear that i am not allowed to have an opinion, because of my kid's iq. Arbitrary, but whatever. You all are so far beyond rational it's pointless. But as a factual matter you are TOTALLY wrong about me in your assumption. I would be delighted to pay higher taxes for better SN services. I never said my kid got the rawest end of this deal. I fully get that the SN kids have it worse. I used to work with them.

Anonymous wrote:If the teacher didn't seem to cherish her role as gatekeeper more people would probably be understanding. I have straight A kids who work hard and aren't anywhere near the 99th NPR percentile in some subjects. This is the type of teacher that would discourage my DS from taking advanced English because his standardized tests scores are too low. I don't ask for special accomodations. I find it condensing to be told that I'm asking for him to be placed in a group above his potential. It is total B.S..

I get the impression that teachers are put into the position of being gatekeepers, it's not that they choose it. If there weren't so many parents clamoring to get their kids, qualified and unqualified, into these advanced programs, then teachers wouldn't have to be gatekeepers. Maybe they have started to view all parents asking for advanced classes with suspicion, and that's not great. But if it's true, it's suspicion born from experience.

If the teacher didn't seem to cherish her role as gatekeeper more people would probably be understanding. I have straight A kids who work hard and aren't anywhere near the 99th NPR percentile in some subjects. This is the type of teacher that would discourage my DS from taking advanced English because his standardized tests scores are too low. I don't ask for special accomodations. I find it condensing to be told that I'm asking for him to be placed in a group above his potential. It is total B.S..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS sets teachers up to fail.

The class sizes are too large to provide adequate instruction. Parents aren't wrong for wanting their kids to do the best that they can BUT the system is not set up to empower teachers to achieve this with their students. The teacher's union, IMO, fails both teachers and students. I fully support increased teacher pay but the teacher's union would be far more successful with more voters if they also advocated for stronger curriculum, better class ratios, and resources for the students. There is too much bargaining that results in paltry pay increases and results in acceptance of crappy systems like MCPS' 2.0.

What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

This is the root of the problem. Everybody says they want better roads/recycling/schools/every other service, but nobody is willing to pay higher taxes.

Here's a corollary: if there's some way we could raise taxes and dedicated them only to gifted kids, not to those SN kids, I'm sure posters like 16:26 would be all over it. But democracies don't work that way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MCPS sets teachers up to fail.

The class sizes are too large to provide adequate instruction. Parents aren't wrong for wanting their kids to do the best that they can BUT the system is not set up to empower teachers to achieve this with their students. The teacher's union, IMO, fails both teachers and students. I fully support increased teacher pay but the teacher's union would be far more successful with more voters if they also advocated for stronger curriculum, better class ratios, and resources for the students. There is too much bargaining that results in paltry pay increases and results in acceptance of crappy systems like MCPS' 2.0.

What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

This is the root of the problem. Everybody says they want better roads/recycling/schools/every other service, but nobody is willing to pay higher taxes.

Anonymous wrote:
So on one hand you admit there isn't room in the magnets for all qualified kids, but then you say the answer is the magnet test. Huh? And what about the years before magnet is an option? So far for my (well-behaved, non special treatment seeking 99th percentile) kid, it's just a waste of time except for the social aspect.

What percent of kids in Lake Woebegon whoops MCPS are in the 99th percentile?

Anonymous wrote:MCPS sets teachers up to fail.

The class sizes are too large to provide adequate instruction. Parents aren't wrong for wanting their kids to do the best that they can BUT the system is not set up to empower teachers to achieve this with their students. The teacher's union, IMO, fails both teachers and students. I fully support increased teacher pay but the teacher's union would be far more successful with more voters if they also advocated for stronger curriculum, better class ratios, and resources for the students. There is too much bargaining that results in paltry pay increases and results in acceptance of crappy systems like MCPS' 2.0.

What size should the classes be? And how many extra teachers will be necessary to teach those smaller classes? And how much more in taxes are you willing to pay for the salaries of those teachers?

Anonymous wrote:
How am I derailing? Where did the teacher say that her gripes about parents only apply to parents of 60th percentile kids? She probably assumes they are 60th percentile kids (or lower), but the point is she is probably wrong in many cases (as ours was). You are strangely hostile.

OP made it very clear that she wasn't talking about parents with legitimate concerns. Here's a cut-and-paste from OP:

Anonymous wrote:
-I have no problem with parents who are strong advocates for their child.
-I have no problem with parents who question a strategy, method, etc.
-I don't even mind your questioning a grade.

What I have a problem with is:
-Skewed expectations of your child's abilities (want them in a higher group than they are capable)
-The expectation of special treatment without valid reason

So, to summarize OP's initial post, all you have to do is show OP your test results and she'll work with you, rather than seeing you as a "problem."

If I'm "strangely hostile," it's because posters like you are responsible for the bad reputation on DCUM of gifted kids and their parents. This negative perception is a real problem for those of us who are concerned about improving MoCo programs for gifted kids.

When parents of gifted kids hijack threads like this to make the thread all about them, it makes them look self-absorbed and dismissive of everybody else's concerns. Again, to reiterate, let me repeat: This thread is clearly about someone else's issues - namely, the issues of a teacher who is dealing with "problem" parents, the parents with "skewed expectations." I sympathize with teachers who have to deal with these "problem" parents, in fact I've seen these "problem" parents in action. Can't we just talk about this, and sympathize with the teachers on this issue, for once?

Why not start your own thread about 99th percentile kids with reasonable parents?

MCPS teacher here who can't possibly read the entire list of replies without vomiting, but to the PP who thinks the teacher has something to do with the email address- um, yeah, that's taken care of at the registrar-enrollment-county level. Remember enrolling your kid in kindergarten? Remember filling out the data forms with the parent / guardian info? Well, you put your email address on that, and then MCPS put it into the MyMCPS system that teachers use to find student contact information. If it's wrong in there, it's not your kid's teacher's fault. I'm sure it has ruined your precious snowflake's life, but look on the bright side- it has given you a sworn enemy. Now you have something to which you can dedicate your brain space.

I don't teach elementary, I teach high school, so instead of 30 kids, I deal with 130+ in a day. Do I claim to know the kids better than their parents do? Absolutely not. But I know from first-hand experience that there is nothing more challenging than being an elementary school teacher. At least by the time the kids get to me, they've been "vetted." They are grouped by ability / level to the extent that there aren't vast chasms that separate the knowledge and ability of some students from that of others. In a kindergarten classroom, the teacher is grappling, by herself, with children who can read chapter books and children who don't even know how to turn a book so that the print is right-side up. All the while she is told that she has to "differentiate the instruction," meaning somehow teach everyone at the same time to each unique ability / understanding. She also can't hurt any feelings, damage any self esteem, she's going to be evaluated on her progress, and several teachers are going to bring in sample lesson plans from TPT?

I challenge each of you to spend time with a group of 30 youngsters BY YOURSELF. Oh, and try to teach them something- don't just let them whack at a piñata and eat pizza and think you've handled something, like at a child's birthday.

To the OP, MCPS is my fourth public school system after several moves around the country. I am your age, and the differences I see in parents (because I've always taught in middle-upper-middle class school systems) has had more to do with time rather than location. Life was easier when parents couldn't contact us around the clock, and nit-pick everything that we're now required to post online. All technology has done is unleash the crazy. They were always over-entitled and crazy- but now you get to hear about it when the irrational emoting first starts to bubble up. Parents used to have to sit and stew and really formulate their thoughts before picking up the phone.

Why do all threads go this route? Why, why? I'm talking about so many MoCo threads that are derailed by some parent of an alleged 99th pctile kid who needs to talk about the care and nurturing of their little genius.

Newsflash: OP started this thread to talk about being bullied by parents. We all know this happens. We have all seen bully parents who want their *average* or *slightly above average* kids to be in advanced classes. We all know that teachers deal with lots of things besides you and your 99th pctile kid. Can we talk about these other things for once? Please?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:14:22 again.

I've seen so many parents harass teachers for special treatment during our years in MoCo that my patience has been worn out by parents (and DCUM posters) demanding special treatment for their snowflakes.

In my experience, the worst parents fall into a few very clear categories:
(1) Big ambitions for their kids. If mom or dad went to Harvard and DC is a legacy there, then watch out, teachers!
(2) Parents are clueless. Sorry, but doing math in kindergarten is not actually that exceptional.
(3) Intelligence used as an excuse for bad behavior. We saw this at our middle school magnet, where one family wanted special rules for their child (child should be allowed to read novels in class, and that's just the start) because this child was supposedly smarter than all the other magnet kids.

I realize the magnets don't have enough room for all qualified kids, and that's a real problem.

But some parents really need to get a grip! If you're on this forum, you're in MoCo. So solve your own problem by having your kid take the MoCo magnet test.

So on one hand you admit there isn't room in the magnets for all qualified kids, but then you say the answer is the magnet test. Huh? And what about the years before magnet is an option? So far for my (well-behaved, non special treatment seeking 99th percentile) kid, it's just a waste of time except for the social aspect.

I get it now. This whole discussion is about you and your 99th percentile kid (has your kid ever been tested, by the way?). OP and other teachers couldn't possibly have legitimate concerns about abuse from parents of 60th percentile kids. Because there's only you and your kid.

Don't be ridiculous. I referred to my kid because that's the one I know (and yes, she was tested -- how else would I know?). Of course others have legit concerns -- I completely agree that many kids, regardless of iq, are getting the shaft in this system.

Great. Then stop derailing the thread to talk about your 99th percentile kid. Let the teachers get back to talking about the abuse they get from the parents of 60th percentile kids.

How am I derailing? Where did the teacher say that her gripes about parents only apply to parents of 60th percentile kids? She probably assumes they are 60th percentile kids (or lower), but the point is she is probably wrong in many cases (as ours was). You are strangely hostile.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:14:22 again.

I've seen so many parents harass teachers for special treatment during our years in MoCo that my patience has been worn out by parents (and DCUM posters) demanding special treatment for their snowflakes.

In my experience, the worst parents fall into a few very clear categories:
(1) Big ambitions for their kids. If mom or dad went to Harvard and DC is a legacy there, then watch out, teachers!
(2) Parents are clueless. Sorry, but doing math in kindergarten is not actually that exceptional.
(3) Intelligence used as an excuse for bad behavior. We saw this at our middle school magnet, where one family wanted special rules for their child (child should be allowed to read novels in class, and that's just the start) because this child was supposedly smarter than all the other magnet kids.

I realize the magnets don't have enough room for all qualified kids, and that's a real problem.

But some parents really need to get a grip! If you're on this forum, you're in MoCo. So solve your own problem by having your kid take the MoCo magnet test.

So on one hand you admit there isn't room in the magnets for all qualified kids, but then you say the answer is the magnet test. Huh? And what about the years before magnet is an option? So far for my (well-behaved, non special treatment seeking 99th percentile) kid, it's just a waste of time except for the social aspect.

In MoCo, for elementary-aged kids, there is actually a gifted magnet at Takoma Park ES (which we did). Although IQ testing is extremely unreliable through about age 8+, but I digress.

For kids aged 8+ who are in the 99th percentile, I already said that I agree with you that there are not enough seats in the HGC, MS and ES magnets. I also said I agree with you that kids at the 99th percentile do need special programs. So do you just want to pick a fight with someone who said she agrees with you, and derail the discussion about the ambitious parents with the 70th percentile kids who won't make the magnets? Or is there an actual area of disagreement here?

The actual area is just that you say parents need to get a grip and the answer is take the magnet test. We disagree that that's the answer. We need better answers than that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:14:22 again.

I've seen so many parents harass teachers for special treatment during our years in MoCo that my patience has been worn out by parents (and DCUM posters) demanding special treatment for their snowflakes.

In my experience, the worst parents fall into a few very clear categories:
(1) Big ambitions for their kids. If mom or dad went to Harvard and DC is a legacy there, then watch out, teachers!
(2) Parents are clueless. Sorry, but doing math in kindergarten is not actually that exceptional.
(3) Intelligence used as an excuse for bad behavior. We saw this at our middle school magnet, where one family wanted special rules for their child (child should be allowed to read novels in class, and that's just the start) because this child was supposedly smarter than all the other magnet kids.

I realize the magnets don't have enough room for all qualified kids, and that's a real problem.

But some parents really need to get a grip! If you're on this forum, you're in MoCo. So solve your own problem by having your kid take the MoCo magnet test.

So on one hand you admit there isn't room in the magnets for all qualified kids, but then you say the answer is the magnet test. Huh? And what about the years before magnet is an option? So far for my (well-behaved, non special treatment seeking 99th percentile) kid, it's just a waste of time except for the social aspect.

I get it now. This whole discussion is about you and your 99th percentile kid (has your kid ever been tested, by the way?). OP and other teachers couldn't possibly have legitimate concerns about abuse from parents of 60th percentile kids. Because there's only you and your kid.

Don't be ridiculous. I referred to my kid because that's the one I know (and yes, she was tested -- how else would I know?). Of course others have legit concerns -- I completely agree that many kids, regardless of iq, are getting the shaft in this system.

Great. Then stop derailing the thread to talk about your 99th percentile kid. Let the teachers get back to talking about the abuse they get from the parents of 60th percentile kids.