Anonymous wrote:Oh, please. The superintendant made this recommendation to continue immersion at SSIMS, not a group of parents. When a large block of students (8% based ona prior post) is out-of-boundary and can be given the benefit of continuing their program at another location, it is a very reasonable proposal. If you as a parent value immersion, and you and some or many students continue at SSIMS, then both the program and cohort will be intact. Or, in the view of the board, you are always welcome to return to the home school if you choose not to continue in immersion.
Anonymous wrote:I'm not a RCFEM parent, but I do live in a neighborhood that feeds into SSIMS. Just to clarify one point, has anyone looked at the number of RCF SI students who would naturally feed into SSIMS if they weren't at RCF?
The reason I ask is b/c I don't completely buy the argument that these kids would essentially be friendless coming over to SSIMS. MANY kids in my neighborhood are in the SI program at RCFEM. They know both the kids in our neighborhood and the kids at school. Some of the parents I know are weighing which middle school they'd want to go to b/c SSIMS would be more convenient.
The kids in our area know each other from so many different places. I suspect the move away from some friends and closer to others is a problem that parents are overestimating.
Anonymous wrote:So much of this boils down to parents' disappointment at not being given a place in a magnet or other special program, combined with MCPS' myopic view of what a "quality education" means and its refusal to create additional spots or programs for parents who want different approaches or kids who need different types of instruction (whether this be GT, LD, or both).
Rather than beat each other up, we should work together to demand that MCPS listen to parents and stop teaching to the middle exclusively. These lottery programs have a 4:1 ratio of applicants to acceptances. In the test-in programs, the ratio is even higher. What message should MCPS get from this?
Anonymous wrote:What the EA parent who keeps complaining about multiple reading levels doesn't seem to understand is that this is what ES is like in MCPS in a school with a population like RCF's. It has nothing to do with SI. MCPS won't acknowledge that it's really impossible to adequately differentiate in reading and language arts within one class if there are students who diverge more than a grade level or so.
It's not like -- if there were no SI -- RCF would group kids into classes according to ability level. That's tracking, and MCPS is adamantly against it.
Interestingly, MCPS isn't against this in math, which is why they allow kids to jump around from class to class. So for example, kids in 4th grade at RCF have three levels of math they can be assigned to -- and these are whole-class levels. Within those levels there's variation of ability and grasp of the concepts, of course, but everyone's pretty much on the same page.
Now the truth is, RCF is a Silver Spring school, in many respects. I don't think that's so bad -- our local Silver Spring school has a great reputation and lots of devoted parents. But it's a different experience than what RCF parents might have been expecting. They should have done more research or thought more critically about why their Chevy Chase houses are $150K - 300K less than those further west in the cluster for the same house. It's due to the proximity of apartments and lower-income residents and other demographic factors -- it has nothing to do with SI.