Old VMPI plans & FCPS’s E3 Math Pilot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

It sounds like you do want them to go deeper with extensions instead of more worksheets.

[Anonymous]

One year of Calculus for STEM kids is not fine, especially the watered down version in FCPS.

Not everyone needs higher level math but some professions do. Kids coming out of FCPS are behind their peers from outside the US and most likely from quality schools in the US.

Don’t hold back the kids who have an affinity for math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One year of Calculus for STEM kids is not fine, especially the watered down version in FCPS.

Not everyone needs higher level math but some professions do. Kids coming out of FCPS are behind their peers from outside the US and most likely from quality schools in the US.

Don’t hold back the kids who have an affinity for math.

One year of calculus is certainly fine for STEM kids. If they want more (unnecessary) math they can do dual enrollment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP the US has fallen in the world educational rankings and like it or not the world now operates on a global scale. I suggest that math majors and engineers take a shot a UK A levels in math, samples available here - https://revisionmaths.com/level-maths/level-maths-past-papers . You are the products of American math programs. These are exams given to 17 & 18 year-olds to help determine which universities they will attend.

The US is currently ranked 24th in the world in math. How much farther do we have to fall.

What percent of UK students pass the math A levels with a high enough score to study in fields requiring them? And do you think that there would not be a similar percentage out of the US that would pass them?

Not every child in the UK takes A levels and not every child who takes A levels takes the math A level. We end up comparing test scores and results out of a US system that does not have tracked programs to programs in Europe and Asia were there is tracking. Students have to test into high schools in many Asian countries. I don’t end up buying that the US is 24th in math because I don’t think that they are comparing similar kids across the board and the US system doesn’t highlight our standouts the way the European and Asian systems do.

This. This is what I don't understand about the rankings. We're pushing *all* public school students to take Calculus in 12th grade? Or at least pre-Calculus in 11th? There are scores upon scores of kids in the UK who stop taking maths completely at 16. In fact, only 28% of students in the UK take the maths A-level which means that 72% of students stop taking math at 16. It feels impossible to compare with the US system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP the US has fallen in the world educational rankings and like it or not the world now operates on a global scale. I suggest that math majors and engineers take a shot a UK A levels in math, samples available here - https://revisionmaths.com/level-maths/level-maths-past-papers . You are the products of American math programs. These are exams given to 17 & 18 year-olds to help determine which universities they will attend.

The US is currently ranked 24th in the world in math. How much farther do we have to fall.

What percent of UK students pass the math A levels with a high enough score to study in fields requiring them? And do you think that there would not be a similar percentage out of the US that would pass them?

Not every child in the UK takes A levels and not every child who takes A levels takes the math A level. We end up comparing test scores and results out of a US system that does not have tracked programs to programs in Europe and Asia were there is tracking. Students have to test into high schools in many Asian countries. I don’t end up buying that the US is 24th in math because I don’t think that they are comparing similar kids across the board and the US system doesn’t highlight our standouts the way the European and Asian systems do.

This. This is what I don't understand about the rankings. We're pushing *all* public school students to take Calculus in 12th grade? Or at least pre-Calculus in 11th? There are scores upon scores of kids in the UK who stop taking maths completely at 16. In fact, only 28% of students in the UK take the maths A-level which means that 72% of students stop taking math at 16. It feels impossible to compare with the US system.

No one is saying everyone should take Calculus in 12th grade, but for those students who want to pursue STEM careers or work in finance or economics need a strong math background to successfully compete at top colleges in the US and abroad. So, for those students, the ability to take math classes beyond Calculus is valuable. If that needs to be through dual enrollment that is fine. But let those options exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

This kind of proves the point. Kids are at varying levels of mathematic skill. A small percentage, as is the case currently, are ready for Algebra I in 7th grade. Many more at 8th and some still waiting until 9th. The study concluded that the rules based mastery was mostly between 15-17. No one is trying to get kids to wait until 10th grade for Algebra I.

But what the study did show is that a small percentage is ready for abstract thinking ahead of their peers. And thats what we currently have with accelerated tracks for a small group of students. Kids are different. Lets meet them at their level.

Why would anyone propose removing that option for kids and their families that is currently available. This does not prevent kids who are not ready from taking the current standard tracks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

Some kids are fine with abstract thinking earlier. We shouldn't be forcing all kids to slow down until all are ready. Many education researchers focus a lot on process skills and less on content knowledge. The latter is important and the more you practice procedures, the better the student comes to understand the material. Cramming Algebra 2 and Precalculus into one year without giving time to spiral through that content over several years as Boaler and San Francisco recommend is not the way to learn the material well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP the US has fallen in the world educational rankings and like it or not the world now operates on a global scale. I suggest that math majors and engineers take a shot a UK A levels in math, samples available here - https://revisionmaths.com/level-maths/level-maths-past-papers . You are the products of American math programs. These are exams given to 17 & 18 year-olds to help determine which universities they will attend.

The US is currently ranked 24th in the world in math. How much farther do we have to fall.

What percent of UK students pass the math A levels with a high enough score to study in fields requiring them? And do you think that there would not be a similar percentage out of the US that would pass them?

Not every child in the UK takes A levels and not every child who takes A levels takes the math A level. We end up comparing test scores and results out of a US system that does not have tracked programs to programs in Europe and Asia were there is tracking. Students have to test into high schools in many Asian countries. I don’t end up buying that the US is 24th in math because I don’t think that they are comparing similar kids across the board and the US system doesn’t highlight our standouts the way the European and Asian systems do.

This. This is what I don't understand about the rankings. We're pushing *all* public school students to take Calculus in 12th grade? Or at least pre-Calculus in 11th? There are scores upon scores of kids in the UK who stop taking maths completely at 16. In fact, only 28% of students in the UK take the maths A-level which means that 72% of students stop taking math at 16. It feels impossible to compare with the US system.

No one is saying everyone should take Calculus in 12th grade, but for those students who want to pursue STEM careers or work in finance or economics need a strong math background to successfully compete at top colleges in the US and abroad. So, for those students, the ability to take math classes beyond Calculus is valuable. If that needs to be through dual enrollment that is fine. But let those options exist.

Most, if not all, STEM undergrad programs don't accept any credit beyond AP Calculus or IB Math Analysis. Math beyond calculus at the K-12 level is superficial at best and burdens teachers with another prep to teach for a relatively small fraction of kids.

Most universities are far more interested in students having deep breadth and rigor across all subjects. Dual enrollment should be the only option to access math beyond calculus. Not FCPS's responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

Some kids are fine with abstract thinking earlier. We shouldn't be forcing all kids to slow down until all are ready. Many education researchers focus a lot on process skills and less on content knowledge. The latter is important and the more you practice procedures, the better the student comes to understand the material. Cramming Algebra 2 and Precalculus into one year without giving time to spiral through that content over several years as Boaler and San Francisco recommend is not the way to learn the material well.

Again, I think offering Algebra 1 in 8th is reasonable and gives the option to do calculus in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP the US has fallen in the world educational rankings and like it or not the world now operates on a global scale. I suggest that math majors and engineers take a shot a UK A levels in math, samples available here - https://revisionmaths.com/level-maths/level-maths-past-papers . You are the products of American math programs. These are exams given to 17 & 18 year-olds to help determine which universities they will attend.

The US is currently ranked 24th in the world in math. How much farther do we have to fall.

What percent of UK students pass the math A levels with a high enough score to study in fields requiring them? And do you think that there would not be a similar percentage out of the US that would pass them?

Not every child in the UK takes A levels and not every child who takes A levels takes the math A level. We end up comparing test scores and results out of a US system that does not have tracked programs to programs in Europe and Asia were there is tracking. Students have to test into high schools in many Asian countries. I don’t end up buying that the US is 24th in math because I don’t think that they are comparing similar kids across the board and the US system doesn’t highlight our standouts the way the European and Asian systems do.

This. This is what I don't understand about the rankings. We're pushing *all* public school students to take Calculus in 12th grade? Or at least pre-Calculus in 11th? There are scores upon scores of kids in the UK who stop taking maths completely at 16. In fact, only 28% of students in the UK take the maths A-level which means that 72% of students stop taking math at 16. It feels impossible to compare with the US system.

No one is saying everyone should take Calculus in 12th grade, but for those students who want to pursue STEM careers or work in finance or economics need a strong math background to successfully compete at top colleges in the US and abroad. So, for those students, the ability to take math classes beyond Calculus is valuable. If that needs to be through dual enrollment that is fine. But let those options exist.

Most, if not all, STEM undergrad programs don't accept any credit beyond AP Calculus or IB Math Analysis. Math beyond calculus at the K-12 level is superficial at best and burdens teachers with another prep to teach for a relatively small fraction of kids.

Most universities are far more interested in students having deep breadth and rigor across all subjects. Dual enrollment should be the only option to access math beyond calculus. Not FCPS's responsibility.

The issue is not course credit but exposure to material which allows either placement in a higher level college math course or provides an early exposure to content which can be repeated for deeper understanding at university. Studies show that kids that take calculus first in high school do better in college calculus than their peers who are seeing calculus for the first time. Same for any level of math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP the US has fallen in the world educational rankings and like it or not the world now operates on a global scale. I suggest that math majors and engineers take a shot a UK A levels in math, samples available here - https://revisionmaths.com/level-maths/level-maths-past-papers . You are the products of American math programs. These are exams given to 17 & 18 year-olds to help determine which universities they will attend.

The US is currently ranked 24th in the world in math. How much farther do we have to fall.

What percent of UK students pass the math A levels with a high enough score to study in fields requiring them? And do you think that there would not be a similar percentage out of the US that would pass them?

Not every child in the UK takes A levels and not every child who takes A levels takes the math A level. We end up comparing test scores and results out of a US system that does not have tracked programs to programs in Europe and Asia were there is tracking. Students have to test into high schools in many Asian countries. I don’t end up buying that the US is 24th in math because I don’t think that they are comparing similar kids across the board and the US system doesn’t highlight our standouts the way the European and Asian systems do.

This. This is what I don't understand about the rankings. We're pushing *all* public school students to take Calculus in 12th grade? Or at least pre-Calculus in 11th? There are scores upon scores of kids in the UK who stop taking maths completely at 16. In fact, only 28% of students in the UK take the maths A-level which means that 72% of students stop taking math at 16. It feels impossible to compare with the US system.

No one is saying everyone should take Calculus in 12th grade, but for those students who want to pursue STEM careers or work in finance or economics need a strong math background to successfully compete at top colleges in the US and abroad. So, for those students, the ability to take math classes beyond Calculus is valuable. If that needs to be through dual enrollment that is fine. But let those options exist.

Most, if not all, STEM undergrad programs don't accept any credit beyond AP Calculus or IB Math Analysis. Math beyond calculus at the K-12 level is superficial at best and burdens teachers with another prep to teach for a relatively small fraction of kids.

Most universities are far more interested in students having deep breadth and rigor across all subjects. Dual enrollment should be the only option to access math beyond calculus. Not FCPS's responsibility.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

Some kids are fine with abstract thinking earlier. We shouldn't be forcing all kids to slow down until all are ready. Many education researchers focus a lot on process skills and less on content knowledge. The latter is important and the more you practice procedures, the better the student comes to understand the material. Cramming Algebra 2 and Precalculus into one year without giving time to spiral through that content over several years as Boaler and San Francisco recommend is not the way to learn the material well.

Again, I think offering Algebra 1 in 8th is reasonable and gives the option to do calculus in HS.

Do you agree with removing current offering of Algebra in 7th to the small group of kids who qualify?

I dont see why you anyone would support removing this option. The county's accelerated science and math offerings in high school are much more expansive than 25 years ago. This is built partly on this small group of accelerated kids who tend to be academically focused across the board. This has contributed to FCPS reputation as an elite school system. TJ is also built on this reputation and its exceptional students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:America is so far behind in math and FCPS isn’t doing its students any favors. Students who want to and are capable should be able to take Algebra 1 in 6th grade and allow students to take more advance math beyond AP Calc and AP Stat as seniors. Particularly those students that want to excel in STEM or other quantitative fields such as Economics.

Why? I took Calc BC as a senior in HS, Diff Eq as a freshman in college, and got a BSEE. I took every undergrad math classes available and ran out by my last year. What's the rush?

Ok, let's be serious for a minute.

What's really at stake is that different children have different abilities, particularly when it comes to mathematics. Because of that, they should be separated so that those who are better (from their aptitude) and engage better (from their passion) can be better challenged. This is an obligation we have as a society.

There is a problem here, which is that we do not have (nearly enough) math teachers in the US who can do that - because most teacher's math skills are rudimentary at best and/or because they are indoctrinated by the math ed folks like Boaler. The only solution we have is to have them cover later, and in general more challenging, topics earlier. This way, teachers can teach from given curricula and follow materials. This is far from ideal but it's the best we have at this point. Those of us whose children have gone through Algebra I/II, Geometry, and even Calculus see how watered down these programs are. My child did worksheet after worksheet in Algebra I, got a 100% as average score on quizzes and tests, but wasn't asked to solve a single interesting math problem the entire year. We needed to supplement a lot, but it still beat the alternative of having them sit in an "extension based" math class on time-wasting activities that for some count as math. (Can you say glue.)

Why do I say this? Because the people proposing "extension based activities" that "go deep" and other nonsense have no clue of mathematics. Read Boaler's emails (Quote: "we are wondering if “inequalities” are at all relevant in data science"). Or recall the total quackery they displayed in the VMPI Youtube broadcasts.

So as much as it's not ideal, asking teachers to teach traditional material to more capable children in a separate setting at a younger age is the best solution we have under the constraints we're under. Incidentally, this is the best solution for everyone regardless of their talent. The alternative is to kill everyone's love of and skills in math the way SFUSD did.

PP here. The San Francisco example is easy to understand and see why it's problematic.

But rather than push for Algebra to be earlier and earlier, why don't we push for a return to rigor that the US public school system used to have?

Exactly.

Rushing kids through the system doesn’t address the issue.

Math reformers like Boaler define rushing as taking Algebra 1 before 9th grade and many local school districts seem sympathetic to that. That might work for some kids, but for many, that is not a good fit. Look at San Francisco's math reform and how it has prompted a surge in workarounds as kids try to get around their 9th grade Algebra 1 policy. Reformers are concerned about rushing math in elementary and middle school but don't seem at all concerned with rushing high school kids who want calculus.

Developmentally, most kids aren't ready for abstract thinking until they are a little older.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4151197/

Even so, I think Algebra 1 should be available to 8th graders as a path to calculus. But acceleration beyond that is unnecessary in the grand scheme of things.

Some kids are fine with abstract thinking earlier. We shouldn't be forcing all kids to slow down until all are ready. Many education researchers focus a lot on process skills and less on content knowledge. The latter is important and the more you practice procedures, the better the student comes to understand the material. Cramming Algebra 2 and Precalculus into one year without giving time to spiral through that content over several years as Boaler and San Francisco recommend is not the way to learn the material well.

Again, I think offering Algebra 1 in 8th is reasonable and gives the option to do calculus in HS.

Do you agree with removing current offering of Algebra in 7th to the small group of kids who qualify?

I dont see why you anyone would support removing this option. The county's accelerated science and math offerings in high school are much more expansive than 25 years ago. This is built partly on this small group of accelerated kids who tend to be academically focused across the board. This has contributed to FCPS reputation as an elite school system. TJ is also built on this reputation and its exceptional students.

I’d be fine with that. Certainly removing it for 6th graders. It’s a race to nowhere.