Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher. I am not familiar with Benchmark, but it is good for new teachers to follow the "directions."
If it is truly based on studies and research, then it is a good idea to follow. After teaching for a while, I'm sure they will adapt some lessons so that it is not "canned."
I taught with teachers who claimed they did not need a teachers' manual. I may not have always used it as intended, but I always tried to hit the purpose of the activities provided.
Basal readers have been much criticized. i liked them--but a good teacher always expands lessons with some creativity. Some teachers ignored the requirements--such as teaching phonics, which were included in basal programs. Many call them "see/say." They weren't see/say, but many teachers skipped the phonics lessons and other skills.
I am a big proponent of phonics and always provided additional phonics lessons outside the book company recommendations. However, there are some kids who really do not get phonics. Teachers need to be able to provide those kids with other tools.
I do not like the idea of phonics only. That gets boring if it is not combined with rich literature and critical thinking skills.
A kindergartener (and depending on reading readiness, other aged kids) should be getting rich literature from read alouds and critical thinking skills from things like retelling the story or learning deeply about background content (which Benchmark attempts). Kids should learn to love stories from hearing stories. As they develop decoding and comprehension skills, then they can dive into those stories themselves.
Critical thinking - this has been proven time and time again - comes best after knowledge acquisition. You can't think deeply about what you know nothing about. Cram little brains full of facts then teach them logic. People knew this was how to teach kids literally millenia ago.
I don't have a kindergartener so I don't know what they're learning right now, but my older ES kids were telling me about what they're learning in Benchmark right now. They're both doing units on ancient cultures and they're both learning a TON. If the kindergarteners are getting the same sort of instruction as the older kids, then they ARE cramming their little brains full of facts. My kid was telling me all about Ancient Greece earlier today. I thought it was social studies, but nope, it's benchmark.
You aren’t in the classroom so you are clueless. Kids don’t know exactly what’s going on either. The reality is Benchmark is awful.

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My 5th grade AAP kid went from enjoying reading to telling me language arts is his least favorite part of the day![]()
I don’t know if it’s the age, the teacher, the curriculum, but this year has been really rough.
+1 my 6th grader who was an advanced reader now absolutely hates reading and LA. She also is worried about how she will do in honors English next year. Her confidence has tanked.
And here's the issue - moms of "advanced kids" are starting to realize that their children were actually very far behind where they should be. Just because your child was getting high comprehension and fluency scores doesn't mean that she was actually an advanced reader and writer, PP. Benchmark is actually digging in to literacy which is something that the previous "curriculum" never did.
If you read the Benchmark reading selections for 6th grade, you would see that many of them are dull and uninteresting. The fiction selections are only one chapter, or part of a chapter, from a novel. Benchmark does not dig in. The questions and answers on the comprehension tests are not very well thought out. It's a case of the emperor having no clothes. Many people are being fooled because we're told that it aligns with the Science of Reading, so we think it's good. But the curriculum is poorly written and the selections are uninspired.
Anonymous wrote:LOVE LOVE LOVE IT!!
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure where parents are getting that their third graders should be reading novels in elementary schools - that's your job as a parent. My kids are literally sitting on the floor reading books this morning because they both woke up early and finished breakfast quickly. Do better, parents!
Reading chapter books in school was part of the balanced literacy, so that’s not returning anytime soon. It should be the parents responsibility to ensure that their students are reading novels.
There’s no time in school to get whole novels read and many students don’t do it on their own, so it should be the parents responsibility.
So classist. Some kids have parents who either can't (illiterate or multiple jobs) or won't read at home.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher. I am not familiar with Benchmark, but it is good for new teachers to follow the "directions."
If it is truly based on studies and research, then it is a good idea to follow. After teaching for a while, I'm sure they will adapt some lessons so that it is not "canned."
I taught with teachers who claimed they did not need a teachers' manual. I may not have always used it as intended, but I always tried to hit the purpose of the activities provided.
Basal readers have been much criticized. i liked them--but a good teacher always expands lessons with some creativity. Some teachers ignored the requirements--such as teaching phonics, which were included in basal programs. Many call them "see/say." They weren't see/say, but many teachers skipped the phonics lessons and other skills.
I am a big proponent of phonics and always provided additional phonics lessons outside the book company recommendations. However, there are some kids who really do not get phonics. Teachers need to be able to provide those kids with other tools.
I do not like the idea of phonics only. That gets boring if it is not combined with rich literature and critical thinking skills.
A kindergartener (and depending on reading readiness, other aged kids) should be getting rich literature from read alouds and critical thinking skills from things like retelling the story or learning deeply about background content (which Benchmark attempts). Kids should learn to love stories from hearing stories. As they develop decoding and comprehension skills, then they can dive into those stories themselves.
Critical thinking - this has been proven time and time again - comes best after knowledge acquisition. You can't think deeply about what you know nothing about. Cram little brains full of facts then teach them logic. People knew this was how to teach kids literally millenia ago.
I don't have a kindergartener so I don't know what they're learning right now, but my older ES kids were telling me about what they're learning in Benchmark right now. They're both doing units on ancient cultures and they're both learning a TON. If the kindergarteners are getting the same sort of instruction as the older kids, then they ARE cramming their little brains full of facts. My kid was telling me all about Ancient Greece earlier today. I thought it was social studies, but nope, it's benchmark.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher. I am not familiar with Benchmark, but it is good for new teachers to follow the "directions."
If it is truly based on studies and research, then it is a good idea to follow. After teaching for a while, I'm sure they will adapt some lessons so that it is not "canned."
I taught with teachers who claimed they did not need a teachers' manual. I may not have always used it as intended, but I always tried to hit the purpose of the activities provided.
Basal readers have been much criticized. i liked them--but a good teacher always expands lessons with some creativity. Some teachers ignored the requirements--such as teaching phonics, which were included in basal programs. Many call them "see/say." They weren't see/say, but many teachers skipped the phonics lessons and other skills.
I am a big proponent of phonics and always provided additional phonics lessons outside the book company recommendations. However, there are some kids who really do not get phonics. Teachers need to be able to provide those kids with other tools.
I do not like the idea of phonics only. That gets boring if it is not combined with rich literature and critical thinking skills.
A kindergartener (and depending on reading readiness, other aged kids) should be getting rich literature from read alouds and critical thinking skills from things like retelling the story or learning deeply about background content (which Benchmark attempts). Kids should learn to love stories from hearing stories. As they develop decoding and comprehension skills, then they can dive into those stories themselves.
Critical thinking - this has been proven time and time again - comes best after knowledge acquisition. You can't think deeply about what you know nothing about. Cram little brains full of facts then teach them logic. People knew this was how to teach kids literally millenia ago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher. I am not familiar with Benchmark, but it is good for new teachers to follow the "directions."
If it is truly based on studies and research, then it is a good idea to follow. After teaching for a while, I'm sure they will adapt some lessons so that it is not "canned."
I taught with teachers who claimed they did not need a teachers' manual. I may not have always used it as intended, but I always tried to hit the purpose of the activities provided.
Basal readers have been much criticized. i liked them--but a good teacher always expands lessons with some creativity. Some teachers ignored the requirements--such as teaching phonics, which were included in basal programs. Many call them "see/say." They weren't see/say, but many teachers skipped the phonics lessons and other skills.
I am a big proponent of phonics and always provided additional phonics lessons outside the book company recommendations. However, there are some kids who really do not get phonics. Teachers need to be able to provide those kids with other tools.
I do not like the idea of phonics only. That gets boring if it is not combined with rich literature and critical thinking skills.
A kindergartener (and depending on reading readiness, other aged kids) should be getting rich literature from read alouds and critical thinking skills from things like retelling the story or learning deeply about background content (which Benchmark attempts). Kids should learn to love stories from hearing stories. As they develop decoding and comprehension skills, then they can dive into those stories themselves.
Critical thinking - this has been proven time and time again - comes best after knowledge acquisition. You can't think deeply about what you know nothing about. Cram little brains full of facts then teach them logic. People knew this was how to teach kids literally millenia ago.
Critical thinking - this has been proven time and time again - comes best after knowledge acquisition. You can't think deeply about what you know nothing about. Cram little brains full of facts then teach them logic. People knew this was how to teach kids literally millenia ago.
Anonymous wrote:I was a teacher. I am not familiar with Benchmark, but it is good for new teachers to follow the "directions."
If it is truly based on studies and research, then it is a good idea to follow. After teaching for a while, I'm sure they will adapt some lessons so that it is not "canned."
I taught with teachers who claimed they did not need a teachers' manual. I may not have always used it as intended, but I always tried to hit the purpose of the activities provided.
Basal readers have been much criticized. i liked them--but a good teacher always expands lessons with some creativity. Some teachers ignored the requirements--such as teaching phonics, which were included in basal programs. Many call them "see/say." They weren't see/say, but many teachers skipped the phonics lessons and other skills.
I am a big proponent of phonics and always provided additional phonics lessons outside the book company recommendations. However, there are some kids who really do not get phonics. Teachers need to be able to provide those kids with other tools.
I do not like the idea of phonics only. That gets boring if it is not combined with rich literature and critical thinking skills.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, it's so much better than anything that has been taught in FCPS elementaries in the past 10 years. I am so glad we finally have a curriculum instead of cobbling things together from previous years and TpT.
Maybe lazy teachers like it because they don’t have to get creative. The lessons are canned and ready for them. The good LA teachers don’t like it. They want real novels. I’m sure the AAP teachers hate Benchmark.
It's been proven over and over again that since you can't get the poor teachers entirely out of school giving canned lessons is the best way to ensure kids aren't left behind during the years they have them.
And there's no reason all AAP teachers are good. Between my kids they had many different elementary AAP teachers and some were amazing and some weren't. So I wouldn't blanket say AAP teachers hate it.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree, it's so much better than anything that has been taught in FCPS elementaries in the past 10 years. I am so glad we finally have a curriculum instead of cobbling things together from previous years and TpT.
Maybe lazy teachers like it because they don’t have to get creative. The lessons are canned and ready for them. The good LA teachers don’t like it. They want real novels. I’m sure the AAP teachers hate Benchmark.