I am not sure I would choose a private school who would not be able to show a child's struggle until a unit was over at testing time. Sounds like a terrible system.

PP here. The private school curriculum was far, far superior. The teaching and assessment was all done from the perspective to help the child work to their potential. This concept is completely absent in MCPS. I could have never imagine a more lackluster and just don't give a damn systemic approach to education. Its really shocking.

DS had problems with the language in word problems. He was smart enough to compensate on homework which didn't have a time restraint, included fewer problems, and was given closer to when the examples were given in class. The tests provided useful information because DS got everything right including the challenge questions but missed several simple word problems. The private school teacher flagged this early on and gave DS extra homework with a broader range of word problems, varying levels of difficulty and more work to make sure he mastered this.

In MCPS it wouldn't have mattered. He would be a P. Who cares whether he knows it or not. My job is done mentality. There is no such thing as rigorous test or assignment in MCPS. The math curriculum was also about a year behind the private school.

I am not sure I would choose a private school who would not be able to show a child's struggle until a unit was over at testing time. Sounds like a terrible system.

Anonymous wrote:Its worse. MCPS does not give tests anymore. In the old curriculum they used to give unit tests but in 2.0, the teacher "observes" the students as they are working. In schools with high scoring students who learn math outside MCPS, it doesn't really matter. In lower performing schools, it provides a false sense of mastery.

Why the scare quotes around "observes"?

Also, how do you know that the sense of mastery is false, if there aren't any tests?

Its worse. MCPS does not give tests anymore. In the old curriculum they used to give unit tests but in 2.0, the teacher "observes" the students as they are working. In schools with high scoring students who learn math outside MCPS, it doesn't really matter. In lower performing schools, it provides a false sense of mastery.

That is a shame that the homework/classwork would not indicate a problem..that sounds very frustrating to wait until the tests to realize it.

Seriously, a gerbil could do math in curriculum 2.0. Its not an indication of anything that your child gets the easy problems correct on the homework.

My DS went to a private school before MCPS. He had difficulty with word problems in the early grades. You wouldn't pick it up from the homework assignments but the problem showed up on his math tests. They don't do any testing in math 2.0, do not give kids challenge or stretch questions, do not give enough problems to see if the kids has mastered anything, and don't provide enough challenging problems.

Why would you say that? PP reviews her child's papers and quizzes. I can easily tell if my child understands a concept of not using the same approach. I don't care about the grade..if they are getting problems wrong we review even if there is a P on the page.

Actually the previous PP has no idea how her kid is doing. She just accepts P blindly and is happy that she doesn't need to put any energy into her child's education. The everything is a P and remedial math concepts is great for parents who aren't that interested in education.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The math question posed is great, it forces the student to translate it into numbers (ie math) or the basic concept of numerical positioning.

What is not so great is the round about, silly ways that MoCo is told to instruct or teach numerical positioning or relationships, exponents or powers of 10. There are multiple ways of teaching it so the concept clicks for a young mind. And it is not the nonsense I've seen in my child's worksheets, most of which I've taken to time to explain differently.

Different people learn differently. We all know that. I don't know how many kids found MCPS way of teaching it click or not, but personal experience, it clicked for my DC. I think no matter how a school teaches a specific math concept, you will always find some that struggle to learn it that particular way.

Are you talking about the new curriculum? How do you find out how your P student is performing?

PP you are asking. I was referring to any curriculum, be it 2.0 or pre.

I know DC is a P or ES student in math because:

1. I look at DC's HW and check the answers.
2. DC's teachers have always handed back HW and class work at the end of the week.
3. DC's test scores - although this is only once or twice a year, over the years it tells me that DC is good at math

Anonymous wrote:

I couldn't care less if it is real world or not. I meant what I wrote. This is not a word problem in the true sense. A word problem involves describing a set of relationships in words so that the students can translate them into mathematical expressions and found answers. This problem deals with knowledge about place value. Very important concept for sure. Hardly word problem worthy.

I'm baffled. For me, a word problem is a problem that has math and words. "How much greater is the number represented by the 4 in 340,638 than the number represented by the 4 in 24,116?" has math and words. Therefore, it is a word problem.

It's also a word problem according to your definition. The mathematical relationship it describes is 40,000 = 4,000 x 10.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The math question posed is great, it forces the student to translate it into numbers (ie math) or the basic concept of numerical positioning.

What is not so great is the round about, silly ways that MoCo is told to instruct or teach numerical positioning or relationships, exponents or powers of 10. There are multiple ways of teaching it so the concept clicks for a young mind. And it is not the nonsense I've seen in my child's worksheets, most of which I've taken to time to explain differently.

Different people learn differently. We all know that. I don't know how many kids found MCPS way of teaching it click or not, but personal experience, it clicked for my DC. I think no matter how a school teaches a specific math concept, you will always find some that struggle to learn it that particular way.

Are you talking about the new curriculum? How do you find out how your P student is performing?

I'm not the PP, but the way I find out how my P student is performing is:

1. talk to my student
2. see what my student does, and how my student does it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The math question posed is great, it forces the student to translate it into numbers (ie math) or the basic concept of numerical positioning.

What is not so great is the round about, silly ways that MoCo is told to instruct or teach numerical positioning or relationships, exponents or powers of 10. There are multiple ways of teaching it so the concept clicks for a young mind. And it is not the nonsense I've seen in my child's worksheets, most of which I've taken to time to explain differently.

Different people learn differently. We all know that. I don't know how many kids found MCPS way of teaching it click or not, but personal experience, it clicked for my DC. I think no matter how a school teaches a specific math concept, you will always find some that struggle to learn it that particular way.

Are you talking about the new curriculum? How do you find out how your P student is performing?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it is so mechanical. just reading of the correct digit of a number and compare.

So it's not a real word problem because it doesn't have much of a plot?

Certainly not as challenging.

So, the problem is that it is not challenging enough or that it is not real world problems?

I think the questions on those tests were pretty challenging for that age group. I bet a lot of adults would get some of the answers wrong.

As to not being real world, seriously? How is 432 x 52 laid out on a test real world? Like I said, real world challenges don't have the math problem laid out for you in a number sentence. You have to figure out the sentence from the word problem. And not everything on a math test that has word problems have to apply to the "real world". My real world doesn't consist of living on a farm but I'm sure I had math word problems that dealt with a farmer and some farm animals or crops.

I couldn't care less if it is real world or not. I meant what I wrote. This is not a word problem in the true sense. A word problem involves describing a set of relationships in words so that the students can translate them into mathematical expressions and found answers. This problem deals with knowledge about place value. Very important concept for sure. Hardly word problem worthy.

Anonymous wrote:The math question posed is great, it forces the student to translate it into numbers (ie math) or the basic concept of numerical positioning.

What is not so great is the round about, silly ways that MoCo is told to instruct or teach numerical positioning or relationships, exponents or powers of 10. There are multiple ways of teaching it so the concept clicks for a young mind. And it is not the nonsense I've seen in my child's worksheets, most of which I've taken to time to explain differently.

Different people learn differently. We all know that. I don't know how many kids found MCPS way of teaching it click or not, but personal experience, it clicked for my DC. I think no matter how a school teaches a specific math concept, you will always find some that struggle to learn it that particular way.

The math question posed is great, it forces the student to translate it into numbers (ie math) or the basic concept of numerical positioning.

What is not so great is the round about, silly ways that MoCo is told to instruct or teach numerical positioning or relationships, exponents or powers of 10. There are multiple ways of teaching it so the concept clicks for a young mind. And it is not the nonsense I've seen in my child's worksheets, most of which I've taken to time to explain differently.