VDOE - VMPI is dead? Isn't that illegal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

It would be foolish to change the curriculum based on a proposal that was likely to be significantly revised before it was finalized, because you might change it in a way that went directly against the final plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

What school system are you talking about? The systems all have different tracks/programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

What math programs did APS “randomly” decide to get rid of?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

APS changed the math track years ago. Before VMPI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

What school system are you talking about? The systems all have different tracks/programs.

What school system in NOVA doesn't follow this track?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

I did have advanced math 5th graders go to 6th -- and both chose to stay at grade level instead of pushing up.
Unfortunately, one was caught in the ridiculous interim changes of the past few years teaching 6-7-8 all together nonsense. Chose to stay grade level for 6th, continued to choose to stay at grade level despite teacher recommendations to jump up.
And yes, I'd be fine not taking the middle school SOLs. Only reason to do so would be to earn the high school verified credits needed for graduating high school - like for World Geography in 8th grade. But they still have plenty of time to earn the few required verified math credits during 4 years of high school.

Regardless, I'd be very happy for my child to have had the opportunity to be a peer tutor. Good experience, reinforce their own knowledge and understanding of the concepts (that would have been presented and pushed earlier than necessary) - and their ability to explain it comprehensively to others. It also shows them how difficult teaching can be and that not all people learn the same way or as easily. They may have had to look at the problems differently and figure out a different way to explain the concepts as they tutored peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

It would be foolish to change the curriculum based on a proposal that was likely to be significantly revised before it was finalized, because you might change it in a way that went directly against the final plan.

+1
Again, there was already a trend of students (1) falling off the advanced math track after alg2 in high school and (2) kids having to re-take calculus in college even after passing it in high school anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

Ok. PP asked what about it was a lie. I answered.

DP. But you never explained how it was a lie. The email said VMPI wouldn’t change the math options, not that LCPS would never change the options independent of VMPI

No, I specifically asked if the county was eliminating acclerated math options in MS and was given a resounding and exasperated no. Even after I linked to their own program of studies stating otherwise.

Sorry. What does this have to do with VMPI?

You keep deflecting. Without evidence, you dismiss people’s actual, real-life experiences with schools eliminating advanced math, by saying over and over:

“Well that’s not VMPI.”

But if you were telling the truth, shouldn’t you have explained:

- what exactly IS VMPI, and

- why do we need it over the current program?


Since you’ve failed to make any case for VMPI, I do not trust you or the VDOE, and I am glad the republicans are halting this murky, unproven, and unexplained overhaul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This has been beaten to death a million times.

They can claim one thing and do entirely another.

They actually can't. It's a regulatory process subject to specific procedural guidelines that include disclosure requirements. Enough with the conspiracy theories.

Ok. But the Loudpun Asst. Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction wrote me an email (that I still have) saying that accelerated math in MS was not going to be affected by the new pathways. That was a bold faced lie.

What about it was a lie?

Algebra 1 in 6th grade is gone, no exceptions.

That was a LCPS decision, not VMPI.

Ok. PP asked what about it was a lie. I answered.

DP. But you never explained how it was a lie. The email said VMPI wouldn’t change the math options, not that LCPS would never change the options independent of VMPI

No, I specifically asked if the county was eliminating acclerated math options in MS and was given a resounding and exasperated no. Even after I linked to their own program of studies stating otherwise.

Sorry. What does this have to do with VMPI?

You keep deflecting. Without evidence, you dismiss people’s actual, real-life experiences with schools eliminating advanced math, by saying over and over:

“Well that’s not VMPI.”

But if you were telling the truth, shouldn’t you have explained:

- what exactly IS VMPI, and

- why do we need it over the current program?


Since you’ve failed to make any case for VMPI, I do not trust you or the VDOE, and I am glad the republicans are halting this murky, unproven, and unexplained overhaul.

VMPI is an initiative by the VA DOE to update the VA math curriculum - they were going to come out with a draft this year (2022) and after a lengthy approval process the finalized changes would go into effect in 2025.

VA school districts take that curriculum defined by VA DOE and come up with their own courses and pathways. Decide what to accelerate and options for advanced tracks.

VA DOE is mandated by law to update the curriculum every 7 years. As part of this process they were researching latest ideas in math education and exploring options to improve the math curriculum. There were a variety of changes they were considering.

There is a lot of info available on the VDOE website:
https://www.doe.virginia.gov/instruction/mathematics/vmpi/index.shtml


PPs were confusing changes made by their local school districts with this effort by the VDOE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

What school system are you talking about? The systems all have different tracks/programs.

What school system in NOVA doesn't follow this track?

Which ones do? Is that FCPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

OK? That’s not VMPI.

DP. I have come to the conclusion that most people complaining about VMPI do t actually know what it is. Kind of like people who hate Obamacare but are big fans of the Affordable Care Act.

I have difficulty believing that people cannot look at what VDOE is proposing and see how school districts could start to adjust their curriculum based on those proposals. Local school districts made similar moves to decrease advanced math tracking at the same time as the State posted presentations, videos, and proposals that laid out the States reasons for decreasing tracked math strikes me as more then coincidence. But of course the answer is that LCPS, FCPS, APS and other school districts randomly decided that programs they had used for a good period of time were no longer effective, independent of any State proposals, and that it would be a great idea to reduce advanced math options.

Totally organic. Not in any way tied back to what VDOE was posting on its website, nope. No connection there. Nope.

It would be foolish to change the curriculum based on a proposal that was likely to be significantly revised before it was finalized, because you might change it in a way that went directly against the final plan.

+1
Again, there was already a trend of students (1) falling off the advanced math track after alg2 in high school and (2) kids having to re-take calculus in college even after passing it in high school anyway.

+1

This isn’t even a uniquely VA public school thing. Other states are slowing down the acceleration. Private schools.

They realized there weren’t enough benefits to accelerate kids 3 years ahead in math. It’s an academic decision, not political.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with an advanced math student knows this is all true. The only ones denying don't have strong math students.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

+1. My kid's principal recently announced that the school will be piloting E3 math next year for all students. At Q&A time one of the parents asked if 5th graders in Advanced Math would continue to take the 6th grade Math SOL under the new program and if 6th graders in Advanced Math would take the 7th grade Math SOL. The principal hemmed and hawed and did not say yes. Students who don't take the 7th grade Math SOL in 6th grade in our district and pass advanced cannot take Algebra in 7th grade. How is that not detracking math?

I don't see a problem with what you're deeming "detracking" of math. Sounds like this is making sure kids are taking the most appropriate level of math. As a PP described, pushing the highest levels as early as possible doesn't always pan out the best way. Main reason slowing down the progression has been looked at is because a lot of students fall off the advanced math path by the time they get to Alg 2 in high school.
This isn't de-tracking. Quite the opposite - it's actually properly tracking kids onto the best path for them.

Did you have a rising 5th grader in Advanced Math? Serious question. If so, would you be okay with them not taking the 6th grade math SOL? If the answer is yes, don’t complain when your child is used as a peer tutor for the next two years.

What school system are you talking about? The systems all have different tracks/programs.

What school system in NOVA doesn't follow this track?

Which ones do? Is that FCPS?

If every school system follows their own track anyway, and VMPI is totally optional (as PP claimed) what is the point of it?

No loss at all if it was optional anyway.