Its a mistake to believe that there are tons of science/math careers out there that need students that overachieved in those areas. The jobs in those fields are extremely small and for the most part they are not well paying.

Anonymous wrote:The flaw to that arguement is that MCPS had lots of math acceleration and they were not successful with it. That is why there is a backlash now. The majority of kids (2/3s's) in my socs ES were 2 year ahead in math (heading for 7th grade algebra). The MS and HS teacher were forced to water down their classes to accomodate these advanced students who were accelerated right past the basic skills. Depsite the fact that we all think our kids need acceleration and are bored. Learning basic facts can be boring. For the few kids who are truely ready..doesn't seem like MCPS has the reasources to run a class for only a few kids...and that is a shame.

Anonymous wrote:
I do agree that education policy makers are not interested in gifted kids, but I don't think they are trying to put down any particular ethnic group. The fact is that schools are now judged on closing the achievement gap and also having as many kids as possible meet some minimum education level. Spending resources to optimize the well prepared kids hurts the achievement gap because it raises the bar needed to close the gap.

Anonymous wrote:I do agree that education policy makers are not interested in gifted kids, but I don't think they are trying to put down any particular ethnic group. The fact is that schools are now judged on closing the achievement gap and also having as many kids as possible meet some minimum education level. Spending resources to optimize the well prepared kids hurts the achievement gap because it raises the bar needed to close the gap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that Curriculum 2.0 is structured as prep for the MSA. I've heard several school admins say this off the record. The reality for math is that it just doesn't matter if kids want to learn math. They only need to perform to the level of the MSA so any resource spent beyond this point is a waste of a resource for MCPS.

Really? That is odd, because our school admins told us that with Common Core standards coming in, MSA would be phased out. Curriculum 2.0 IS the MCPS way of adopting common core. There will be testing, but it won't be MSA, and we were told it would be very different from MSA. The proposed timing we heard was that those kids finishing kindergarten now are unlikely to take MSA, as the new tests will be in place by the time they hit 3rd grade. MSA may remain for middle and HS as 2.0 is rolled out to the those grades, but I am not sure.

I bet your school administration also told you that 2.0 was great and that parents and teachers really support it too, right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that Curriculum 2.0 is structured as prep for the MSA. I've heard several school admins say this off the record. The reality for math is that it just doesn't matter if kids want to learn math. They only need to perform to the level of the MSA so any resource spent beyond this point is a waste of a resource for MCPS.

Really? That is odd, because our school admins told us that with Common Core standards coming in, MSA would be phased out. Curriculum 2.0 IS the MCPS way of adopting common core. There will be testing, but it won't be MSA, and we were told it would be very different from MSA. The proposed timing we heard was that those kids finishing kindergarten now are unlikely to take MSA, as the new tests will be in place by the time they hit 3rd grade. MSA may remain for middle and HS as 2.0 is rolled out to the those grades, but I am not sure.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I relayed a conversation with my 1st grader and another parent made an assumption that because something requires no thought and is easy that the child was bored. That was an incorrect extrapolation. Easy does not always lead to boredom- her (and her classmates) creative response is a high level of sociability. Perhaps I should have noted I had been observing the class that day (and do go in periodically when they ask for volunteers). I've been surprised by the consistent noise and lack of direction when I walk in on occasion. On the other hand, for the most part it is "happy noise" without conflict so I attribute this to the work style of the current teacher.

I do not in any way discount the needs of the ESOL kids- this is first grade and no doubt they will be fluent in English and better off for speaking multiple languages within a couple of years. My point was that if the kids speak English as a native language, most of the work is not challenging. And, given the "no acceleration" policy with the new curriculum, they will provide extra work, but it is busy work and not inherently challenging. Without the challenge the tasks can be fun, but they do not expand thought or require as much concentration as your average video game. If you want progress, you have to do additional work at home. This is not just true for the gifted students, it's true for a large number of students.

The fact is, the note that they sent home indicates that all students should be getting 100% right on their spelling every week. They are all being given the same words, but the reading levels are vastly different. Why not give them words that reflect the level where they currently are? Why not push all children? I'm not saying all the time, but yes, a lot more than they do now.

DD is finishing first grade a Silver Spring ES. Her class does not all get the same spelling words. Those on first grade spelling get one set of patterned words, those on second grade spelling get a different set of patterned words. The high frequency words are even more individualized because kids will continue to get the high frequency words each week until they spell them correctly. So some may have three new high frequency words and two repeats from last week, some may have five new words, some none, etc. A couple of the kids in DD's class have moved up to third grade high frequency words because they tested through all the first and second grade words.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that Curriculum 2.0 is structured as prep for the MSA. I've heard several school admins say this off the record. The reality for math is that it just doesn't matter if kids want to learn math. They only need to perform to the level of the MSA so any resource spent beyond this point is a waste of a resource for MCPS.

Really? That is odd, because our school admins told us that with Common Core standards coming in, MSA would be phased out. Curriculum 2.0 IS the MCPS way of adopting common core. There will be testing, but it won't be MSA, and we were told it would be very different from MSA. The proposed timing we heard was that those kids finishing kindergarten now are unlikely to take MSA, as the new tests will be in place by the time they hit 3rd grade. MSA may remain for middle and HS as 2.0 is rolled out to the those grades, but I am not sure.