S/O Integrated Algebra 3 course

[Anonymous]

Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

[Anonymous]

Sounds terrible and not all schools have two years of extra math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

[Anonymous]

So what does MSDE expect LEAs to do?

[Anonymous]

The state doesn't know what it's going to do and they don't care what you think, so this is just fanfiction.

Other states already have Integrated Algebra(with Geometry) so there is no mystery to solve.

AI makes school obsolete so it's all navel-gazing Titanic deck-chair-rearranging horse-and-buggy-optimization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Not all schools have MV.

Yup, but they will need to.

lol, not going to happen.

[Anonymous]

They could call the pre-Precalc course Foundations of Intermediate Mathematics. To be sure it wasn't a waste of time, they could combine the missing bits from the 2-year Integrated Algebra with Prob/Stats and Financial Math, giving it some applications orientation and solid underpinnings for some of the more important concepts encountered in the real world, maybe throwing in some History of Math for fun/enrichment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Starting a new thread in response to the back-and-forth we had on the GT programs thread re the new integrated math sequence.

Background: The state is requiring a new math sequence starting with the 2027-2028 school year. Instead of Algebra 1, Geometry, and Algebra 2, they will require Integrated Algebra 1 and Integrated Algebra 2 based on some, but not all, of the standards from the three-course sequence. The thought is that many kids don't go onto calculus and therefore don't need all the standards to prepare for pre-calculus. Those who don't take pre-calculus will take Integrated Algebra 2 (presumably sophomore year) and then take two non-calculus courses for the next two years (say, stats and financial mathematics).

Those who are on the calculus track need a third course to learn the standards needed to succeed in pre-calc. Many already have problems with precalc after the current three-course sequence; they will do even worse if only two courses are offered.

MCPS will have to create its own Integrated Math 3 course and add in the missing standards so that students will succeed. However, it's not simple -- there are currently three-year integrated math curricula on the market because integrated algebra tends to be offered as a three-year sequence. There is even one from Illustrative Mathematics. None of these curricula, however, align neatly with the standards that the state will have covered in the first two years of the integrated math sequence.

With a kid who suffered through C2.0, I am very wary of MCPS writing its own curriculum, and I am not sure that Illustrative Mathematics would want to create a curriculum aligned with the state requirements. MCPS and the state just aren't big enough markets to warrant this investment -- it's not like MD is leading the way on this and other states will follow.

They can offer an accelerated/enriched Honors PreCalc for those doing well in Integrated Algebra 1 & 2 (and, perhaps, on the new state test at the end of IA2) that fills in the missing bits, like some of Trig. For those not flying through but wanting to pursue the Calc pathway defined by the state, they can offer the bridge course you mention leading to a following-year PreCalc (AP or otherwise). Either should allow for a student then to take it slower with AP Calc AB, followed by Calc BC if a year remains) or more directly with AP Calc BC (AB is not necessary to take before this), followed by MVC if a year remains.

None of the 3-year off-the-shelf Integrated Algebra curricula are likely to comport with the standards mandated by MSDE for Integrated Algebra over 2 years.

Honors precalc is already a very challenging class, which many students who have done well with acceleration to that point struggle with. I don’t think they will add more standards to that.

They could create an honors integrated math sequence to cover 3 years of standards in 2, but they would also continue to have to offer integrated math 3 for students who are on the calc track but not ready for the accelerated course.

I also think that MCPS will try to get rid of compacted math, particularly if they offer the accelerated integrated math option to cover 3 years in 2. Otherwise, students on the advanced track will need to get through MVC in MCPS, and I doubt they want to offer this in all school (or think it is appropriate for most advanced kids).

-OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The state doesn't know what it's going to do and they don't care what you think, so this is just fanfiction.

Other states already have Integrated Algebra(with Geometry) so there is no mystery to solve.

AI makes school obsolete so it's all navel-gazing Titanic deck-chair-rearranging horse-and-buggy-optimization.

I am only aware of other states that have a 3-year integrated math sequence covering all the standards. MSDE is creating a 2-year sequence, only covering some of the standards,which is the problem. There is no curriculum that is available to cover a 2-year sequence. MSDE has created the problem and left it up to districts to solve — never a good situation.

-OP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They could call the pre-Precalc course Foundations of Intermediate Mathematics. To be sure it wasn't a waste of time, they could combine the missing bits from the 2-year Integrated Algebra with Prob/Stats and Financial Math, giving it some applications orientation and solid underpinnings for some of the more important concepts encountered in the real world, maybe throwing in some History of Math for fun/enrichment.

If I had faith that MCPS would use a high-quality curriculum for such a course, I would be on board. But I worry that they would write a bad curriculum for this. My kids were burned by 2.0.

Given that Illustrative Mathematics is open source, they could go through the integrated math curriculum and rearrange topics to create a new three-year sequence that follows the required MSDE standards for the first two years, and then adds whatever is missing in the third year for kids on the calc track. They could also create a compacted version of that class (integrated math 1+ and integrated math 2+), but I doubt they will without strong push from parents/students.

Central office already tried to decrease math acceleration options, including by trying to get rid of compacted math and AIM several years ago. If that had happened, students would only have be able to get through Algebra 1 by 8th grade. Parents pushed hard to keep the current accelerated options.

-OP

[Anonymous]

I recommend they get exception for a 3yr math course and leave it as it from Illustrative Mathematics.

As for the 2yr, they can use the 3yr curriculum to remove components to create the 2yr course. It's easier to remove than it is to add. Most likely they will remove the Trigonometry portions.

[Anonymous]

This is what MSDE says about post-Integrated Algebra:

Beginning in SY 2027-2028, all courses beyond Integrated Algebra 1 and 2 must be aligned to
secondary math pathway standards. Schools and districts must provide access to a variety of
secondary mathematics pathways that align with different career and academic interests.
a. In alignment with the Launch Years Task Force recommendations, secondary math
pathways include Quantitative Reasoning, Data and Data Analytics, Algebraic
Foundations of Calculus, and Statistics and Probability as outlined in Appendix C.
School leaders must ensure that these pathways are flexible and allow for movement
between them based on student progress or evolving interests.
i. Quantitative Reasoning pathway develops real world mathematical skills in
problem-solving, modeling, financial literacy, and data-driven decision-making.
ii. Data and Data Analytics are increasingly essential, and this pathway builds
foundational skills in data analysis, programming, and mathematical reasoning.
It leverages technology to explore real-world datasets and prepare students for
a data-driven future.
iii. Algebraic Foundations of Calculus pathway is designed for students pursuing
STEM fields. It provides a deep exploration of functions and change in
preparation for Calculus.
iv. Statistics and Probability builds students’ understanding of data, uncertainty,
and statistical inference. It focuses on using quantitative research on real-world
phenomena to enhance understanding of relationships in the world around us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They could call the pre-Precalc course Foundations of Intermediate Mathematics. To be sure it wasn't a waste of time, they could combine the missing bits from the 2-year Integrated Algebra with Prob/Stats and Financial Math, giving it some applications orientation and solid underpinnings for some of the more important concepts encountered in the real world, maybe throwing in some History of Math for fun/enrichment.

If I had faith that MCPS would use a high-quality curriculum for such a course, I would be on board. But I worry that they would write a bad curriculum for this. My kids were burned by 2.0.

Given that Illustrative Mathematics is open source, they could go through the integrated math curriculum and rearrange topics to create a new three-year sequence that follows the required MSDE standards for the first two years, and then adds whatever is missing in the third year for kids on the calc track. They could also create a compacted version of that class (integrated math 1+ and integrated math 2+), but I doubt they will without strong push from parents/students.

Central office already tried to decrease math acceleration options, including by trying to get rid of compacted math and AIM several years ago. If that had happened, students would only have be able to get through Algebra 1 by 8th grade. Parents pushed hard to keep the current accelerated options.

-OP

Or, how about since kids are declining in math, go back to traditional teaching and do the normal sequence with textbooks, structured classes and homework for reinforcement. Stop changing things when all the changes don't work.