Is there such a thing as too much acceleration?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is a math major at an Elite school. In HS they stopped at BC and instead took AP stats for "fun". They haven't had any trouble keeping up to date. Let your kids be themselves.

Had you taken Calculus BC freshman year of HS could you see that 4 years later that might had been to much of a gap in time to apply that to otter classes?

Maybe if they had just taken BC early and then stopped Math. I don't think that would have worked at their school, kids are expected to take a course in each core area every term.

The kid is very smart, grades were never an issue. They focused on taking a regular load of classes each year with the most difficult rigor available at the school for their pace. They finished with 14 APs, a very high GPA and time for solid ECs and starting on a team that was ranked 8th in the country.

They are a Math major at a school that parents on this board dream of daily and they don't feel at like they are at any disadvantage in terms of keeping up. One of their teammates (a year older) basically followed the same path and they are a math major at U Chicago, also no challenges.

I don't think that acceleration beyond BC is necessary for success as a Math major at any of these schools but that just comes from watching a couple of very successful kids who stopped at BC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Complex analysis? You don’t reach that until Calc 1-3, Linear Algebra, typically an intro to proof course, and real analysis 1- sometimes 2.

Complex Analysis 1 depends on a little bit of multi variable, and real analysis 1, which is just formal calculus, which often is that intro to proof course.

Linear Algebra is great but not a prereq for complex analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is your child a math prodigy? If yes, and you have other evidence for it, it will help your admission. If not, I would say that calculus AB in 9th grade is too much acceleration resulting in superficial grasp of the material.

I'm not sure what "evidence" you mean- DS doesn't do math competitions because it's not his thing. but he does many problems a day for fun. he likes experimenting with topics outside of class. also, he has an A in class and aces every test, so I think he has a prety strong grasp of the material.

this means nothing, sorry.
do you have any math background? it's hard for parents with no background to judge how good their kid is in math.

Your comment means nothing because you have no basis from which to judge the parents qualifications.

actually i do. i very much doubt OP would even ask this question publicly if she had significant math background. our own kid is highly accelerated and we constantly quiz her to make sure there are no gaps and her foundation is rock solid.

Yeah. That sounds healthy.

Sounds like good parenting. School standards have dropped. Highly educated parents who aren’t educating their children are negligent.

Sounds like abuse Karen

Cry me a damn river. “Abuse” isn’t calculus Jane. Get a grip, some people have real problems.

And I suspect that your child is among them.

They’re successful and getting internships. What are yours doing? Complaining online about how difficult life is, and sporting blue hair and pronoun stickers?

They aren't nearly as successful as yours.

They are only a nationally recognized athlete at a T10 with an internship lined up in a well known area of NYC. Probably because they didn't accelerate enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Well, yeah. But school math is super different from competition math. The problems on the AMC, AIME, USAMO, are just very very difficult versions of things on the high school syllabus (algebra, geometry, etc). Whereas these accelerated kids are learning entirely new topics that don't show up in competition math. Competition math also prioritizes tricks, logic, seeing patterns and puzzles, etc (plus speed, obviously). It's like comparing apples to oranges. And I don't think that kids who excel at competition math necessarily do well in school math, and vice versa.

Your ill-informed commentary is proving my point. You're completely unaware of what advanced math is. Calculus is just a minor extension of algebra and geometry, anyone tiny thing called 'dx'.

Kids who actually study algebra and geometry with proofs thoroughly, starting in elementary school or middle school , don't need a "college level" calculus class or intro to proofs class. They can go right from precalculus to real analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Well, yeah. But school math is super different from competition math. The problems on the AMC, AIME, USAMO, are just very very difficult versions of things on the high school syllabus (algebra, geometry, etc). Whereas these accelerated kids are learning entirely new topics that don't show up in competition math. Competition math also prioritizes tricks, logic, seeing patterns and puzzles, etc (plus speed, obviously). It's like comparing apples to oranges. And I don't think that kids who excel at competition math necessarily do well in school math, and vice versa.

Your ill-informed commentary is proving my point. You're completely unaware of what advanced math is. Calculus is just a minor extension of algebra and geometry, anyone tiny thing called 'dx'.

Kids who actually study algebra and geometry with proofs thoroughly, starting in elementary school or middle school , don't need a "college level" calculus class or intro to proofs class. They can go right from precalculus to real analysis.

And you're mad because....?

A kid who does well on AIME/USAMO who does Calc BC as a senior is definitely more impressive than a kid who gets a B in Real Analysis as a sophomore, in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is your child a math prodigy? If yes, and you have other evidence for it, it will help your admission. If not, I would say that calculus AB in 9th grade is too much acceleration resulting in superficial grasp of the material.

I'm not sure what "evidence" you mean- DS doesn't do math competitions because it's not his thing. but he does many problems a day for fun. he likes experimenting with topics outside of class. also, he has an A in class and aces every test, so I think he has a prety strong grasp of the material.

this means nothing, sorry.
do you have any math background? it's hard for parents with no background to judge how good their kid is in math.

Your comment means nothing because you have no basis from which to judge the parents qualifications.

actually i do. i very much doubt OP would even ask this question publicly if she had significant math background. our own kid is highly accelerated and we constantly quiz her to make sure there are no gaps and her foundation is rock solid.

Yeah. That sounds healthy.

Sounds like good parenting. School standards have dropped. Highly educated parents who aren’t educating their children are negligent.

Sounds like abuse Karen

Cry me a damn river. “Abuse” isn’t calculus Jane. Get a grip, some people have real problems.

And I suspect that your child is among them.

They’re successful and getting internships. What are yours doing? Complaining online about how difficult life is, and sporting blue hair and pronoun stickers?

They aren't nearly as successful as yours.

They are only a nationally recognized athlete at a T10 with an internship lined up in a well known area of NYC. Probably because they didn't accelerate enough.

By the way, most of the US national high school champions study under the tutelage of a coach who, besides winning a gold medal in the International
Math Olympiad, says this:

"Pronouns? Couldn’t care less, use whatever comes naturally to you.

"Gender identity? Cis-het. Though I defected to girl fashion because guy fashion is idiotic."

maga trolls are so stupid, they don't even know what smart looks like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So much spite from parents whose kids didn't have the intellectual capability of taking Calculus as a freshman.

Now it's a bad thing a kid is great at math and takes linear eq or diff equations in high school!

How sad. To the OP, if your kid is great in math, enjoys it, then there is no such thing as "too much acceleration". Just be prepared for too much envy and resentment.

Well it is a bad thing if the kid isn't the one driving the process. Every kid I've known at our HS who got to BC in Junior year (we don't have MVC and you have to get approval to do BC before AB) is a kid who is always studying, never socializing at all, has no Sports or ECs that are not STEM related---these were kids whose parents are largely driving it all (my one kid knew 3 of them, and the kids were mostly miserable and not allowed to have a life beyond academics). So yeah it is not normal to be 3-4 years advanced in math. Kids need time to learn the material and there is plenty of things to do to enrich math/stem if they are interested without just pushing calculus (and college level math) down to 9th grade.

ANd I say this as a parent of a kid who moved between 5th and 6th grade. My kid was 2 grade levels ahead. The new district didn't advance kids until 6th grade. I could have easily put them in Alg 1 in 6th grade, but I wanted them to develop socially in a new environment, and I didn't want to have to figure out how to get them to/from the HS for 8th grade math (Algebra 2) and what to do for junior/senior year math (no MVC). So they took 7th grade math/pre Alg again in 6th grade---didn't learn anything new until the last month, but they were in class with 7th/8th graders (as a new 6th grader who knew nobody). But it let them adjust to the totally new life they had without stress of a bad teacher for totally new material (potentially) and with students who they wouldn't see the next year (mostly 8th graders if they took Alg 1). Sure my kid could have done that and we would have figured it all out---but they are at a T40 school as an engineering major, who started in Calc 3 and did just fine.

Almost every AAP kid takes calculus their junior year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was talking with a friend who also has a kid in 9th. DS is taking Calc AB and her kid is in Geometry. She said that too much acceleration is a bad thing, and that we should be careful because it can make kids seem like overachievers and/or gunners. At first I thought it's just jealousy and that she is mad my kid is so advanced, but then I thought there may be some truth to what she is saying. It seems these days, colleges aren't looking for excellence so much as quirkiness and that kids who do well in subjects like math, aren't valued at all. It doesn't help that we're Asian. Anyway. I'm wondering what other people think.

PS. My younger child is in 7th and is not on an accelerated track. Both kids are happy and love school.

Too much acceleration? Depends on the kid and what they want to do.
As long as they are getting A's it's not going to hurt them but it's not clear how much it will help them either.
Once you can check the box for high rigor. I think you can probably do this by taking AP calculus in high school, your friend's kid is on track for this their senior year. However, it would be nice to have it done by junior year so it is in your transcript, so I would try to be on track to take calculus by junior year.
But after that, colleges don't really see linear algebra or multivariable much differently than APUSH or other rigorous AP classes.

If you want to lean into the math in a way that colleges care about, then I think the baseline is qualifying for AIME.
There are like 3000 kids that are qualify to take that test so it's very nice but it's not a very high bar.
From there you want to qualify for the USAMO
That's like 500 kids and that is a small enough number that it can get you into a very selective school if you have otherwise great stats and ECs.
From there you want to qualify for the math olympiad summer program at carnegie mellon
That's like 100 kids and this will usually get you into pretty much any school you want.
After that you are in very rare company and you can write your own ticket.

Your numbers are off by 2X (250 make it to USAMO and 50-60 make it to MOP (Olympiad summer program). But the overall point is correct. This does make the kid "unique" or at least one of a select few. But I think OP said that her kid wasn't that interested in competition math. In any case, as long as the kid is doing well, has avenues to take challenging and advanced math courses or even basic linear algebra, it can't be a drawback. For those suggesting that somehow acceleration will diminish development in other subjects, the kid has to take some math course if not accelerated in any case. So how does taking, say MVC/Linear Algebra not leave room for APLANG/AP Lit/APUSH etc on their schedule.

I was thinking of the USAMO and USAJMO combined.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Complex analysis? You don’t reach that until Calc 1-3, Linear Algebra, typically an intro to proof course, and real analysis 1- sometimes 2.

Complex Analysis 1 depends on a little bit of multi variable, and real analysis 1, which is just formal calculus, which often is that intro to proof course.

Linear Algebra is great but not a prereq for complex analysis

Real analysis 1 is usually after a formal proof class. Very few schools throw you straight into real analysis right after Calc 3 or linear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is your child a math prodigy? If yes, and you have other evidence for it, it will help your admission. If not, I would say that calculus AB in 9th grade is too much acceleration resulting in superficial grasp of the material.

I'm not sure what "evidence" you mean- DS doesn't do math competitions because it's not his thing. but he does many problems a day for fun. he likes experimenting with topics outside of class. also, he has an A in class and aces every test, so I think he has a prety strong grasp of the material.

this means nothing, sorry.
do you have any math background? it's hard for parents with no background to judge how good their kid is in math.

Your comment means nothing because you have no basis from which to judge the parents qualifications.

actually i do. i very much doubt OP would even ask this question publicly if she had significant math background. our own kid is highly accelerated and we constantly quiz her to make sure there are no gaps and her foundation is rock solid.

Yeah. That sounds healthy.

Sounds like good parenting. School standards have dropped. Highly educated parents who aren’t educating their children are negligent.

Sounds like abuse Karen

Cry me a damn river. “Abuse” isn’t calculus Jane. Get a grip, some people have real problems.

I think the PP is saying that it would be abusive to do that with the PP children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those who claim math acceleration is detrimental to admission into highly selective colleges are off their rocker so long as the student does well in the classes. It's this simple: a student taking linear or diff equations or elements of numbers or field theory or whatever, will have a stronger applicant file than a student who doesn't have that on their app. That's true if the student comes from a high resource school where everyone is taking calc bc their senior year. It is also true for the student in some underresourced school who went into their local college system.

I think a lot of parents who have children on the "regular" sequence of Calc BC by junior or senior year are bitter that there are students more capable than theirs.

Calc BC your junior or senior year is NOT "Regular". Normal is Percalc senior year, but for "good schools" it's becoming Calculus by senior year. Taking AP/College leveled courses in HS is NOT "regular".

DP, for the most part, conversations on DCUM are elite schools and elite standards. Not a single person DD has met at her Ivy hasn’t done Calc 1 at least.

While I agree that most kids at T25 schools have taken calculus (if offered at their HS), DCUM is NOT all elite and elite standards. Plenty of kids are only 1 year advanced or on track and do well in life. Get out of your bubble

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Well, yeah. But school math is super different from competition math. The problems on the AMC, AIME, USAMO, are just very very difficult versions of things on the high school syllabus (algebra, geometry, etc). Whereas these accelerated kids are learning entirely new topics that don't show up in competition math. Competition math also prioritizes tricks, logic, seeing patterns and puzzles, etc (plus speed, obviously). It's like comparing apples to oranges. And I don't think that kids who excel at competition math necessarily do well in school math, and vice versa.

I am the PP that talked about competitions. I was just responding to the OP that asked about accelerated math and college.
It doesn't hurt but it doesn't really help that much IME.
Success at competition math OTOH helps a lot.

[Anonymous]

Not every kid taking advanced math (math above Calc BC like Linear Eq/Diff Equations, etc. wants to be a math major. Some do it because it is fun and challenging, like millions of people doing their wordle every day.

[Anonymous]

Tl;dr

No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not bad, it's just not good by itself.

If your kid is the top math student in their school, that will be noted in recommendations. If not, than being overaccelerated whike falling behind in ability/achievement is a missalocation of effort.

Compare going to community college for a limited quality version (compared to the elite school or honor college programs this kid will be interested in) of Linear Algebra or Complex Analysis or Number Theory or Algebra, as online classes or an extra commute, with college students classmates who don't have the same mathematical aptitude, and then going to university and meeting a bunch of classmates who know each other from HS and are better prepared for the university courses,

vs the alternative of being on the more common (but still rare) highly accelerated pace on the regular school honors ladder, but going much deeper every year with "contest math", which in practice is a really a nice preview of that same college level material, while also being more social and fun for math-loving kids doing math with their peers. Or doing a research project with a mentor or a online yearlong EC program with a cohort.

The kids and parents who think they are hyper elite because no one else in town is as advanced in school math, and school math is all they do, have a rude awakening when they get to college and realize how much education they missed.

Now, all this is for math people. On the other hand, if your kid doesn't care that much about math but wants to bang out requirements for CS or engineering and graduate early or double major and not need much math for career, sure, play the credits game. But the credits won't help with admissions.

Well, yeah. But school math is super different from competition math. The problems on the AMC, AIME, USAMO, are just very very difficult versions of things on the high school syllabus (algebra, geometry, etc). Whereas these accelerated kids are learning entirely new topics that don't show up in competition math. Competition math also prioritizes tricks, logic, seeing patterns and puzzles, etc (plus speed, obviously). It's like comparing apples to oranges. And I don't think that kids who excel at competition math necessarily do well in school math, and vice versa.

I am the PP that talked about competitions. I was just responding to the OP that asked about accelerated math and college.
It doesn't hurt but it doesn't really help that much IME.
Success at competition math OTOH helps a lot.

I think this pretty much sums it up.