Algebra in private schools
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| St. Andrew's offers Algebra I for students in either 7th, 8th or 9th. Like many other schools, after Algebra I there are different levels of depth in all subsequent classes (regular vs. accelerated, until you hit the APs) |
Anonymous
Absolutely. It's when the ones who are pushed into accelerated math when they shouldn't be that this issue arises. The students you are referring to are a very small percentage. I should have been more clear! |
Anonymous
|
Potomac School offers Math 7 and Math 8. I am not entirely sure what this means but was told that they do algebra both years and tie in geometry into the mix as well.
Is anyone familiar with Potomac school? DC will be starting 7th grade there in Sept. The curriculum description online was not very clear to me. |
Anonymous
Unfortunately, many of those kids then start private high school and don't do nearly as well in math as you would think. Algebra can be developmental and pushing it earlier and earlier doesn't mean a program has 'depth,' or that many of the kids who take it will do well later in higher level classes. What's the big rush? Just to say that your kid is taking algebra as a 7th grader? I don't get it. |
Anonymous
| MCPS or FCPS are the places you'd want to be with a very advanced math student. Privates do certain things well, but aren't known as the best places for math. |
Anonymous
|
Taking algebra in 7th is just stupid. Kids who do this will have to keep progressing through 12 grade or, more likely, meet college math requirements by taking AP Stats.
The evidence is piling up that more and more kids who took math classes too early have to do remedial work later in high school. |
Anonymous
|
Peeps, I was a math major at a minor Ivy and did very well. I did not see calc. until college. Cool it.
I did however surprise myself since I entered calculus as a college student with the class full of people who had done it in HS. They got lower grades than I did. They might have been over confident, and math was never a struggle for me. I was tracked into low groups from MS, so did not get to do calculus in HS. I also got a 740 on the math SAT with out ANY prep (that was in the days that NO ONE prepped for the SAT, 1970s). I am now a statistician. |
Anonymous
Why not? |
Anonymous
What evidence? |
Anonymous
Must be the exact same evidence piling up that early reading, writing, language study, running, swimming, and computer programming is bad for you and will require remedial athletic or academic work later on. It's amazing the number of fools out there with no ability to think critically but push espoused talking point crap. |
Anonymous
While I wouldn't say that early reading creates the need for remedial work later, I do think there is too strong of a push to get kids reading early when the early years are best spent developing creativity and problem solving through play. I have two teens. One was an early reader, self taught. My other teen learned to read on the late side, very end of 1st grade, and is a star student and beautiful writer. Definitely the more creative thinker of the two. I think the point on early math is a bit different. Its very seductive -- you can move a bright kid through the hoops through the math stages and they may do very well pursuing the step by step grind. I think you can do this with almost any child with above average intelligence. But what you lose in the process is developing the ability to think mathematically. And you also sacrifice retention. This isn't true for every child obviously, but it is a very real risk. And once you have a child doing calculus you aren't going to go back and get them to think in more depth about algebra or geometry. Thats why the skills won't be retained and will be very superficial. |
Anonymous
|
I don't have time to find the study and I will quote estimates of the numbers but here goes.
If 13% of the population is "above average" in Math why are 30% of the kids taking "advance math". It is fine for the 13% to take the "advanced math" but for the other 17% it is not good, not just not good but bad for retention, learning to enjoy math (because it is a thorn in their side because they are being pushed to hard, etc) and test grades. In the past, advance students took advance math. Now kids are taking advanced math to have a better peer group and to "track" to Calculus, which parents think is important for college (which is a whole other subject). So for the 13% it is greaqt for the other 17% it is bad. Also, there is a study about kids learning to read and write too early having negative consequences. Especially writing (the mechanics of fine motor skills are not developed in a 3 year old, etc.). But again that is another subject. Also, it is bad to put kids in athletic situations where they are "over their head". They should have good coaching, learn to love the sport, etc. before middle school and not be tracked before that. It causes burnout, specific muscles strains, etc. The best example is a child starting to pitch at 5 years old and trying to sustain that type of exertion on their arm for a long period of time. Also, kids that only play one sport only work 1 set of muscles and tend to have more injuries. |
Anonymous
| Because you are a slow runner now does not mean you should run or train with slow runners. Challenge and stimulation are physiologic necessities of life for survival. In fact, accommodation, growth and compensation in physiology would dictate the slow runner train with those a little faster for ultimate optimal development and progression. Math is no different. This approach just might bring the best out of one rather than condemn one to mediocrity. We have choices. As a teacher and coach I witness daily the importance of the "pacing rabbit" in the classroom and on the athletic field or swimming lanes. Strategically pairing the slow with the faster is optimal for the best improvement of the former. I will not change tried and true methods of success in the classroom or on the athletic fields/pools for the wisdom of stay at home "mathematicians" and nonathletes. Too much acceleration, too much alcohol, too much fried food, too much exercise too much ... is bad is simply no defense for common sense. Too much of anything good (let alone math) we all know can be bad for you! |
Anonymous
| A recurring problem at my DC's school is that a couple kids take the Hopkins CTY summer programs and rush through algebra in 4 weeks during the summer. The problem isn't with the math prodigies, it's the very bright 7th graders who get around 600 on the math SAT. They learn to solve for x but they don't have a full understanding of the subject. Some will falter in geometry while others won't run into problems until Algebra 2/Trig. It's not a terrible tragedy, but it shows the value of actually taking enough time on the material to make sure the kids get a solid foundation for math as a language, not a set of mechanical calculations. If the goal is to get through AP Calc BC in high school, why finish algebra before 8th grade? |
Anonymous
| 4 weeks of Algebra in the summer for middle school students is not a year of high school algebra. But, there are many middle school students who perform well with a year of high school algebra. Let's compare apples with apples. No one is advocating that a 4-week summer exposure to CTY algebra, calculus or precalculus is equivalent to a year of exposure. That would be preposterous. Conversely, it is not preposterous for a capable 6th grader to hit a high school algebra course right out of the park. |