Yesterday, the Superintendent of Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) unveiled a new feature in The Bulletin, a newspaper for the school district employees. It would feature “a five-question interview with someone in MCPS.” As a taxpayer and the parent of an MCPS student, I would like to respectfully submit five-questions for the Superintendent.
(1) The inflammatory term tracking is often used without disclosing that it was term associated with the rigid sorting of kids by ability popular in the sixties. Why is it introduced into the dialogue about education when tracking does not exist today?
(2) MCPS has developed Curriculum 2.0 which it is marketing through publishing giant Pearson as Pearson Forward. How would you reconcile the goal of developing a curriculum particularly suitable for the children of Montgomery County with the goal of developing a curriculum that is marketable in a wide range of markets? Specifically, could you explain why you think a curriculum that is suitable for the mass market would also be the best suited for our children?
(3) MCPS has made collaboration a cornerstone of its teaching-learning philosophy. What scientific evidence can you cite to justify crowding out individual effort in favor of collaboration?
(4) It can’t be disputed that gifted and talented education is mandated by state law. Why is MCPS reticent to express its commitment to a requirement imposed by state law?
(5) Despite the oft expressed commitment by MCPS to welcome all voices and opinions, some opine that it continues to exhibit a propensity to stifle dissent and promote sycophants. How would you respond?