PSA MCPS math warning

[Anonymous]

Yes, it's the MS math sequence under 2.0. Algebra I, Geometry and Algebra II are weak on symbolic computation. Even something as simple as rationalizing a denominator, is explicitly forbidden by the curriculum even in Algebra II. I guess this is considered too pedantic, but it's the sort of practice that is needed for radicals to become second nature. Instead there is lots of examining graphs and qualitative work. But a qualitative understanding isn't of much use to someone who never develops a muscle memory for computation.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse since I said something similar in another thread, but MCPS math actually doesn't begin until pre-calc. Unfortunately, it's sink or swim at that point, because suddenly all these un-practiced skills are expected to be solid. Which means a lot of material crammed into one year.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, lots of "Mom-work" going on here. But we knew that would be the case and opted for MCPS over privates since I kind of have the time to stay on top of it.

This was not the case when we bought back in 2010. MCPS was like a different school district. Everyone with kids there (I had worked at Lockheed) were super happy. Then in 2013, ppl started looking at privates if their kids were just starting, or rejoicing that their kid was already at Churchill, WJ, or Whitman and getting out in 4-6 years, bypassing Common Core.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I have a kindergartener. What should I be doing to supplement now and in the future? Thank you!

singapore math books. I get mine from amazon.

Never opened or bought these books. Take a look at IXL programming and let your kid (not you) have at it.

DS got a 270 MAP-M tests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, it's the MS math sequence under 2.0. Algebra I, Geometry and Algebra II are weak on symbolic computation. Even something as simple as rationalizing a denominator, is explicitly forbidden by the curriculum even in Algebra II. I guess this is considered too pedantic, but it's the sort of practice that is needed for radicals to become second nature. Instead there is lots of examining graphs and qualitative work. But a qualitative understanding isn't of much use to someone who never develops a muscle memory for computation.

I feel like I'm beating a dead horse since I said something similar in another thread, but MCPS math actually doesn't begin until pre-calc. Unfortunately, it's sink or swim at that point, because suddenly all these un-practiced skills are expected to be solid. Which means a lot of material crammed into one year.

Interesting. It seems like many of the curricula designed to fit common core standards focus a lot on qualitative work, whereas private schools tend more to be sticking with their historic practices (including more focus on proofs for students in honors tracks). From what you read on these boards, the big problem with math in MCPS right now is that unless you end up in the middle and high school science/math/computer magnets, there isn't much opportunity for more advanced kids. Yes, you can take compacted match in 4th/5th to get on a faster track and take Geometry in 8th (which some privates don't offer), but the actual teaching of math seems weak outside of those programs. Would love to hear from people who have experienced otherwise though...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, lots of "Mom-work" going on here. But we knew that would be the case and opted for MCPS over privates since I kind of have the time to stay on top of it.

This was not the case when we bought back in 2010. MCPS was like a different school district. Everyone with kids there (I had worked at Lockheed) were super happy. Then in 2013, ppl started looking at privates if their kids were just starting, or rejoicing that their kid was already at Churchill, WJ, or Whitman and getting out in 4-6 years, bypassing Common Core.

Yes, older DC missed skirting the HS rollout by one year, so knows plenty kids on the other side of that line. It's quite dramatic. Know mathematicians through work, many with younger kids and each in succession discovers in horror just how poor their kid's education is going to be under Common Core.

[Anonymous]

The dilution of math is upsetting. Are colleges continuing to drop math requirements for non-STEM majors as well? I ask because this may be part of the justification for more qualitative study in ES and MS. Disturbing.

[Anonymous]

Is it really Common Core standards that are the problem or is it the way the standards are tested and taught?

[Anonymous]

Yep. Massachusetts schools are better hands-down overall than MCPS.

[Anonymous]

Is it really Common Core standards that are the problem or is it the way the standards are tested and taught?

Its MCPS interpretation of Common Core that is way off. CA is based on common core but they have actual tests and still focus on computation. I believe that Mass also has common core. Common Core doesn't require computation to be thrown out the window or develop a home grown awful curriculum. Its a myth that Math 2.0 is the fault of 2.0. The math 2.0 disaster is the MCPS curriculum office. They created this shit show with Pearson.

The second and equally impactful problem that is unique to MCPS is the utter lack of rigorous testing. Everyone gets a P, all kids are passing, repeat something basic but never truly assess is all MCPS. MCPS wants the lower performing kids not to lose confidence by failing so they hide the fact that they are failing. They also want to drive more resources toward the lower performing students so not actually testing and teaching the kids with more aptitude gets hidden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it really Common Core standards that are the problem or is it the way the standards are tested and taught?

It's Common Core and it's the twisted curriculum 2.0 that MD put in place to accomplish the Common Core standards.

Remember, Obama came up with Common Core when he was upset that the educational bar was low in Alabama and MIssouri. Not MCPS.
So he rolled out Common Core, attached Fed funds to it if states subscribed and got a decent uptake. Regardless if one's state or large counties had better standards, teaching, customization, effectiveness or scores.
MD paid Pearson's millions of dollars to come up with textbook-less Curriculum 2.0 plus a multi-million dollar recurring Chromebook contract.
It rolled out in 2012 with K-6 with little teacher training and was a total disaster. It continued up the chain of grades. and now is undergoing constant tweaks. There are frequent annual MAP tests for the county to track how its students may do on the May PARCC.

Typical test the the test antics with a big federal funds carrot bribe at the end. Have you seen the class schedule for a 1st or 3rd grader? two hours of math, then two hours of reading, lunch, two hours of english, 45 mins of rotational subject matter.

[Anonymous]

I correct myself, it WAS the county that paid pearson's not maryland and the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Is it really Common Core standards that are the problem or is it the way the standards are tested and taught?

Its MCPS interpretation of Common Core that is way off. CA is based on common core but they have actual tests and still focus on computation. I believe that Mass also has common core. Common Core doesn't require computation to be thrown out the window or develop a home grown awful curriculum. Its a myth that Math 2.0 is the fault of 2.0. The math 2.0 disaster is the MCPS curriculum office. They created this shit show with Pearson.

The second and equally impactful problem that is unique to MCPS is the utter lack of rigorous testing. Everyone gets a P, all kids are passing, repeat something basic but never truly assess is all MCPS. MCPS wants the lower performing kids not to lose confidence by failing so they hide the fact that they are failing. They also want to drive more resources toward the lower performing students so not actually testing and teaching the kids with more aptitude gets hidden.

I think it's a little of both. MCPS has done a particularly bad job of creating a CC curriculum by pushing out 2.0 entirely in-house, without textbooks, etc. But even though none of the CC standard are faulty individually, the level of lip service to deep understanding and other vague notions, give curriculum reformers license to run rough shod over anything that was done in the past. So it's not surprising that there are the same complaints from FCPS and other school districts and it's the exceptions that have made things better.

I just take issue with the concepts like algebraic thinking. I gather algebraic thinking is when a student can turn around a problem in their head and get the right answer. But I'd argue algebra begins when the student can force that thinking into an abstract problem and explain it symbolically, even though it's easier to just solve in their head. This is pedantic, but it's actually a huge step for kids and it takes practice and quite a bit of convincing. At least that's been the hurdle I've seen with my kids and I did not find the curriculum at all supportive.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for this thread. Such good info.

We do a ton of mom-work at home and I wonder if it’s worth it. Will stay on top of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its MCPS interpretation of Common Core that is way off. CA is based on common core but they have actual tests and still focus on computation. I believe that Mass also has common core. Common Core doesn't require computation to be thrown out the window or develop a home grown awful curriculum. Its a myth that Math 2.0 is the fault of 2.0. The math 2.0 disaster is the MCPS curriculum office. They created this shit show with Pearson.

Are all the common core curricula developed by Pearson (e.g., enVision) this bad, or is the one MCPS developed uniquely bad? I should note that my understanding is that Pearson was more of a consultant on C2.0, rather than the actual developer, so perhaps the others associated with Pearson are better?

[Anonymous]

Since both Maryland and Massachusetts adopted common core, there must be something that Massachusetts does better than Maryland. Anybody can say what that is?